Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court To Hear Tomorrow Pleas Challenging Suspension Of 7 BJP MLAs From Delhi Assembly Budget Session
The Delhi High Court has adjourned till tomorrow (February 20), hearing in the petitions filed by 7 BJP MLAs challenging their suspension from the remainder of the Budget session of the Delhi Assembly, for allegedly interrupting the Lieutenant Governor's address.Justice Prasad will hear arguments on interim relief tomorrow. "The only question is, what has been the consistent view of this...
Arbitration Clause Is Not Void U/S 29 Of Contact Act, For Stipulating Multiple Choices Of Seats; Delhi High Court Allows Section 11 Petition
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh held that if an arbitration agreement stipulates multiple seats of arbitration, thereby, offering a choice to the parties is not void under Section 29 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 declares agreements uncertain in meaning or incapable of being made certain as void. Brief Facts: The matter pertained to a Purchase...
Delhi High Court Comes To Aid Of Visually Impaired Assistant Professor Of Delhi University Asked To Vacate Hostel Accommodation
The Delhi High Court intervened on Tuesday in a matter concerning a visually impaired Assistant Professor at Delhi University, who has been asked to vacate her allotted hostel accommodation.Sharmishthaa Atreja, the petitioner, who is visually impaired, and works as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts, University of Delhi approached the court seeking to quash...
Can't Invoke Writ Jurisdiction To Challenge Award Under MSME Act, Without Availing Remedy U/S 34 Of A&C Act; Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court division bench of the Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that a party cannot file a writ petition under Article 226/227 challenging the arbitration award under Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 without taking recourse to a statutory remedy for challenging an award under Section 34 of the...
Period Spent In Disposal Of Appeal Before CESTAT Shall Not Be Counted Towards Period Stipulated Under Section 28 (9) Of Customs Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the period spent in the disposal of the appeal before the CESTAT, i.e., between the filing and the final order being passed, shall not be counted towards the period stipulated under Section 28 (9) of the Customs Act.The bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that the Tribunal has already heard the appeal of the petitioner...
Subramanian Swamy Moves Delhi HC Alleging Rs.5100 Crores Scam In Max Life's Transactions With Axis Bank, Seeks Expert Probe
By way of a public interest litigation, BJP leader Dr Subramanian Swamy has moved the Delhi High Court against an alleged scam of Rs.5100 crores involving Axis Bank making undue gains from transactions in shares of Max Life Insurance.The plea was listed today before the Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora.Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao,...
Will Procedure Under Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Apply To Cases Instituted Before Its Commencement? Delhi HC Refers Yes Bank's Appeal to Larger Bench
The Delhi High Court has referred an appeal filed by Yes Bank to a larger bench, seeking its guidance on the issue of whether the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 would apply to cases instituted before the commencement of the Act, due to a difference of opinion with an earlier judgement by a coordinate bench. The principal question for consideration was whether an appeal filed by Yes Bank...
MSME Facilitation Council Can't Refer Enterprises To Arbitration For Contracts They Signed Before Registration Under MSME Act: Delhi H.C.
The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan held that registration under the MSME Act is a prerequisite for availing its benefits, and such benefits cannot be claimed retrospectively for contracts entered into before registration. The bench held that the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council doesn't have the power to entertain the dispute under Section 18 of...
Absence Of Term “Seat” In Arbitration Clause, Exclusive Jurisdiction Can Be Derived From Intention Of Parties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 11(6) Application
The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Narula held that the intention of the parties to grant exclusive jurisdiction can be derived from the language of the arbitration clause even in the absence of the usage of the term “seat” in the arbitration clause. The bench held that if there is an agreement explicitly or impliedly stating a seat of arbitration, the...
Absence Of Term “Seat” In Arbitration Clause, Exclusive Jurisdiction Can Be Derived From Intention Of Parties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 11(6) Application
The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Narula held that the intention of the parties to grant exclusive jurisdiction can be derived from the language of the arbitration clause even in the absence of the usage of the term “seat” in the arbitration clause. The bench held that if there is an agreement explicitly or impliedly stating a seat of arbitration, the...
Delhi High Court Orders Meta Platforms, Telegram To Disclose Details Of Accounts Deceiving Investors Under The Name Of 'Sequoia Capital'
The Delhi High Court has directed social media giants Facebook and Telegram, along with a Domain Name Registrar (DNR), to submit reports in sealed cover revealing the identities of individuals behind accounts, channels, or websites suspected of deceiving people using the name of 'Sequoia Capital', a US-based venture capital firm.Justice Sanjeev Narula ordered the Meta Platforms Inc....
Delhi High Court Summons ANI In Defamation Suit For Carrying Interview Allegedly Making False Triple Talaq Accusation Against Muslim Man
The Delhi High Court today summoned Asia News International (ANI) in a defamation lawsuit filed by a Muslim man questioning an interview aired by the agency in which his wife allegedly made false claims that she was subjected to Triple Talaq (instant divorce) for not bearing a male child.The woman alleged that her husband, petitioner herein, pronounced Triple Talaq after 23 years of marriage....