Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1711 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1748

NOMINAL INDEX

NBCC (India) Limited vs. Additional Commissioner CGST Delhi South 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1711

LEAYAN GLOBAL PVT LTD v. BATA INDIA LTD and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1712

Frankfinn Aviation Services (Pvt.) Ltd. v. M/S Fly High Institute & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1713

NISHA KHAN v. DELHI POLICE & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1714

Lifestyle Equities C.V. and Anr v. Priyanka Alpeshbhai Polara 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1715

Au Naturel Beauty Private Limited v. Wet and Dry Personal Care Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1716

Patanjali Foods Limited v. Assistant Commissioner CGST Narela Division & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1717

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1718

RAJAN SAREEN v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1719

Surinder Kumar Choudhary v. Google LLC & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1720

Shantanu Prakash v. CBI and Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1721

Mandeep Singh v. Shabir Momin & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1722

JK India (Fabs) vs. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1723

Manikjeet Singh Kals vs. Union of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1724

Onesto Labs Private Limited v. Manishaben Bhaveshbhai Narigara & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1725

Hero Investcorp Pvt. Ltd. and Anr v. Kartar Industries 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1726

CASC v. Union of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1727

Vishal Sharma v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1728

X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1729

MD. Aniqul Islam VS. Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1730

SEBI vs Amit Jain 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1731

Malkit Singh Proprietor Makhan Fish Corner v. Registrar Of Trade Marks 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1732

MAHUA MOITRA v. LOKPAL OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1733

Varner Retail Services South Asia Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner Division - Okhla, Central Goods And Service Tax (Delhi South) & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1734

Saumya Chaurasia v. Union Of India & Others 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1735

MSA Global LLC Oman v. Engineering Projects India Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1736

M/S Era Infra Engineering Limited v. Joint Commissioner Cgst Delhi South Commissionerate & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1737

ANMOL AMBANI v/s UNION BANK OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1738

M/S Truespices India Inc v. Union Of India & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1739

Mohit Mann v. UoI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1740

Navneet Bansal v. Additional Commissioner CGST Delhi North 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1741

Surinder Kumar v. Rahul Khanna 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1742

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurugram Vs. Deepak Kumar Aggarwal 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1743

Jamia Hamdard Deemed to be University vs. Asad Mueed & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1744

M/S J.K. Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Sh. Jai Kishan Bansal v. Superintendent, Delhi North, Ward-24, Zone-1, Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1745

M/S Guru Kirpa Enterprises v. Office Of The Commissioner Of Customs (Export) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1746

Punjab FC Private Limited v. Posshusa Apparels India Private Limited & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1747

Indraprastha Gas Limited vs. Ambrish Kumar 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1748

Delhi High Court Quashes ₹45.36 Crore GST Demand Against NBCC After Finance Ministry Clarification

Case Title: NBCC (India) Limited vs. Additional Commissioner CGST Delhi South

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1711

The Delhi High Court has quashed a Rs 45.36 crore GST demand raised against NBCC (India) Ltd, a state-owned construction and project management company under the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, in connection with the redevelopment of East Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi.

Delhi High Court Upholds Interim Injunction Against 'Power Flex' In Bata's Trademark Infringement Suit

Title: LEAYAN GLOBAL PVT LTD v. BATA INDIA LTD and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1712

The Delhi High Court has upheld a single judge order granting interim injunction restraining an entity from using the mark “POWER FLEX” for footwear in a trademark infringement suit filed by Bata.

Delhi High Court Temporarily Bars Rival Aviation Institute From Infringing Frankfinn's “FLY HIGH” Trademark

Case Title: Frankfinn Aviation Services (Pvt.) Ltd. v. M/S Fly High Institute & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1713

The Delhi High Court has passed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining Fly High Institute, a Nagpur based aviation institute, from using the marks “FLY HIGH,” “FLY HIGH INSTITUTE,” “FH FLY HIGH INSTITUTE,” or any other mark deceptively similar to “FLY HIGH,” a registered trademark of Frankfinn Aviation Services (Pvt.) Ltd.

Post Failure Claims For Correction In Exam Forms Not Entertainable, Candidates Must Verify Details: Delhi High Court

Title: NISHA KHAN v. DELHI POLICE & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1714

The Delhi High Court has held that post failure claims for correction in exam forms cannot be entertained and candidates must verify the details.

Delhi High Court Restrains Mumbai Apparel Brand Using Logo Similar To Beverly Hills Polo Club

Case Title: Lifestyle Equities C.V. and Anr v. Priyanka Alpeshbhai Polara

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1715

The Delhi High Court has temporarily restrained a Mumbai-based clothing business, Vivaan Enterprise, from using polo player logos on its apparel after finding them deceptively similar to the well-known “Beverly Hills Polo Club” brand.

Delhi High Court Allows Au Naturel Beauty To Rebrand NEUDE As BE NEUDE In Dispute With Wet and Dry

Case Title: Au Naturel Beauty Private Limited v. Wet and Dry Personal Care Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1716

The Delhi High Court has allowed cosmetics brand Au Naturel Beauty Private Limited to switch from the mark “NEUDE” to “BE NEUDE,” holding that the new mark would eliminate the risk of confusion with rival brand Wet and Dry Personal Care Private Limited's trademark “NEUD.”

Delhi High Court Quashes Pre- Insolvency Resolution GST Demands Against Patanjali Foods

Case Title: Patanjali Foods Limited v. Assistant Commissioner CGST Narela Division & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1717

The Delhi High Court has set aside GST demands raised against Patanjali Foods Limited (Ruchi Soya) for periods preceding the final approval of its insolvency resolution plan on September 4, 2019. The court held that all statutory dues not included in the approved plan stood extinguished.

Stridhan, Gifts Not Source Of Income To Defeat Wife's Claim For Maintenance: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1718

The Delhi High Court has ruled that stridhan, inherited property or gifts received by a wife from her parents or relatives cannot be construed as a source of income so as to defeat her claim for maintenance from the husband.

Mere Filing Of Complaints Even If Later Found False Not Defamation: Delhi High Court

Title: RAJAN SAREEN v. STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1719

The Delhi High Court has observed that mere filing of complaints even if they are later found to be false does not automatically constitute the offence of defamation.

Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of 'Objectionable Content' Against Jammu & Kashmir Deputy CM On Social Media

Title: Surinder Kumar Choudhary v. Google LLC & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1720

The Delhi High Court ordered removal of objectionable content on social media against Surinder Kumar Choudhary, Deputy Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir.

Accused Cannot Demand Company and Bank Records During Investigation To Answer Queries: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Shantanu Prakash v. CBI and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1721

The Delhi High Court has held that an accused cannot invoke Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to seek production of company and bank records during an ongoing investigation merely to help him answer questions during interrogation, ruling that such a demand would amount to allowing the accused to interfere with the investigation.

Delhi High Court Imposes ₹20 Lakh Costs On Instant Bollywood Founder In Trademark Dispute

Case Title: Mandeep Singh v. Shabir Momin & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1722

The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of Rs 20 lakh on Instant Bollywood founder Mandeep Singh for suppressing material facts about his knowledge of four trademark registrations first secured in Shabir Momin's name and subsequently assigned to Times Internet, while ordering status quo on the assignment.

Delhi High Court Directs To Re-Assess Bills Of Entry, Allows Infra Cess Exemption On E-Golf Carts Owing To Technical Glitch

Case Detail: JK India (Fabs) vs. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1723

The Delhi High Court in a matter where importer could not avail Infrastructure Cess exemption due to technical glitch, has directed the Customs Department to re-assess and refund the excess Infrastructure Cess of ₹55,876.29 paid by the Petitioner on imported electrically operated golf carts.

Delhi High Court Upholds GST Adjudication Despite SCN Being Signed By One Officer & Reflected On Portal Under Another Officer's Name

Case Name: Manikjeet Singh Kals vs. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1724

The Delhi High Court has upheld the adjudication process in a matter involving validity of a Show Cause Notice which was signed by an Officer, but portal reflected the same under the name of another Officer.

Delhi High Court Temporarily Bars Sale Of FOXTEEL Hair Products Over Similarity With Bare Anatomy Trade Dress

Case Title: Onesto Labs Private Limited v. Manishaben Bhaveshbhai Narigara & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1725

The Delhi High Court has restrained the manufacture, sale and marketing of hair care products sold under the brand name 'FOXTEEL', holding that their packaging is deceptively similar to the 'Bare Anatomy' products of premium personal care company Onesto Labs Private Limited.

Delhi High Court Orders 'HERO' Mark Infringer To Pay ₹2.5 Lakh To NGO For Obstructing Court-Ordered Search

Case Title: Hero Investcorp Pvt. Ltd. and Anr v. Kartar Industries

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1726

The Delhi High Court has directed a Sonipat-based manufacturer of motorcycle parts to pay a total of Rs 5 lakh after finding that it obstructed a court-ordered search in a trademark infringement case involving the “HERO” marks owned by Hero Investcorp Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi High Court Declines PIL Seeking "Four Times" Compensation For Tickets Recently Cancelled By IndiGo, Judicial Inquiry Against DGCA

Title: CASC v. Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1727

The Delhi High Court has declined a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking four times compensation for flight tickets recently cancelled by Indigo airlines, as well as a judicial inquiry against the DGCA over recent lapses which left millions of travellers stranded.

Delhi High Court Asks Centre To Issue Guidelines For Engagement Of Govt Counsel Within Three Months

Title: Vishal Sharma v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1728

The Delhi High Court granted three months time to the Union Government for issuing guidelines for engagement of counsels to represent its various departments.

One Year Separation Period For Presenting First Motion For Divorce By Mutual Consent Not Mandatory: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1729

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the one year separation period required as a pre-requisite for presenting the first motion for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act is not mandatory and can be waived.

GST | Cannot Seek Pre-Arrest Bail At Stage Of Summons, Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea By Tobacco Trader

Case Detail: MD. Aniqul Islam VS. Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1730

The Delhi High Court has dismissed Writ Petitions challenging GST Summons issued by the Enforcement Agency, Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI) alleging clandestine trading of tobacco on 'merits'.

Appointment Of SEBI Adjudicating Officer To Conduct Inquiry Is An Administrative Step, Not Finding Of Guilt: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SEBI vs Amit Jain

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1731

The Delhi High Court has held that the appointment of an adjudicating officer by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is only an administrative step to initiate an inquiry and does not amount to finding of guilt at that stage.

Delhi High Court Reinstates 'Makhan Fish Corner Trademark', Cites Non-Application Of Mind By Registry

Case Title: Malkit Singh Proprietor Makhan Fish Corner v. Registrar Of Trade Marks

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1732

The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Trade Marks Registry that removed the trademark “MAKHAN FISH CORNER” from the Register of Trade Marks, holding that the decision was poorly reasoned and ignored important evidence.

Cash For Query Row: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Lokpal's Order Granting Sanction For CBI Chargesheet Against Mahua Moitra

Tile: MAHUA MOITRA v. LOKPAL OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1733

The Delhi High Court granted relief to Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra and set aside an order passed by the Lokpal of India granting sanction to the CBI to file chargesheet against her in relation to the cash for query row.

SVLDR Scheme Can't Be Invoked For Fresh SCN Issued After Deadline Even If Arising From Same Dispute: Delhi High Court

Case title: Varner Retail Services South Asia Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner Division - Okhla, Central Goods And Service Tax (Delhi South) & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1734

The Delhi High Court dismissed a retail business' plea seeking benefit of government's tax amnesty scheme for a second show cause notice issued to it post the cut-off date, in pursuance of the first SCN.

Prosecution Can Be Initiated Without Waiting For ITAT Penalty Confirmation In High-Value Cases: Delhi High Court

Case title: Saumya Chaurasia v. Union Of India & Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1735

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that approval of collegium of two CCIT/DGIT rank officers is only required in cases where tax evaded is less than the threshold limit of ₹25 Lakh.

Delhi High Court Upholds Stay On ICC Arbitration In Oman-India Border Security Dispute, Dismisses MSA Global's Appeal

Case: MSA Global LLC Oman v. Engineering Projects India Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1736

The Delhi High Court has upheld an anti-arbitration injunction issued by a single judge to discontinue an ICC arbitration between Engineering Projects India Ltd (EPIL) and MSA Global LLC (Oman).

GST Department Can't Raise Fresh Demands For Pre-CIRP Period After Resolution Plan Approval: Delhi High Cou

Case title: M/S Era Infra Engineering Limited v. Joint Commissioner Cgst Delhi South Commissionerate & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1737

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the GST Department cannot raise fresh demands for a period prior to the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, after the resolution plan has been approved by the NCLT.

Delhi High Court Quashes Bank's Decision Declaring Account Of Jai Anmol Ambani's Firm As Fraudulent

Case title: ANMOL AMBANI v/s UNION BANK OF INDIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1738

The Delhi High Court quashed a decision by the Union Bank of India declaring bank account of Anil Ambani's son Jai Anmol Ambani's firm as fraudulent.

Export Held Up Due To Conflicting Lab Reports: Delhi High Court Asks Customs To Decide Pan Masala Exporter's Plea

Case title: M/S Truespices India Inc v. Union Of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1739

The Delhi High Court has asked the Customs authorities to consider releasing the bank guarantee of a city-based pan masala exporter, forfeited after conflicting lab reports about adulteration of its export products with tobacco.

Customs | Attending Weddings Can't Justify Indian Origin Foreigner Bringing Half Kilogram Gold Jewellery: Delhi High Court

Case title: Mohit Mann v. UoI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1740

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that under the garb of attending weddings where wearing gold jewellery is a common affair, a foreigner of Indian origin cannot be permitted to bring half kg gold jewellery to India.

Fraudulent CENVAT Credit Allegations Involving Complex Facts Not Fit For Writ Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court

Case title: Navneet Bansal v. Additional Commissioner CGST Delhi North

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1741

The Delhi High Court has held that the precedents barring invocation of writ jurisdiction in cases involving complex GST/ ITC transactions equally apply to cases of fraudulent CENVAT Credit.

IPR Disputes On Same Issues Can Be Heard Together Even If Pending in Non-Commercial Courts: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Surinder Kumar v. Rahul Khanna

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1742

The Delhi High Court has ruled that intellectual property disputes involving the same or overlapping issues should be heard together to prevent parallel cases and conflicting decisions, even if some of those cases are pending before non-commercial courts.

Income Tax Act | S.153C Trigger Starts On Handing-Over Date, Not Search Date: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurugram Vs. Deepak Kumar Aggarwal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1743

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurugram, upholding the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order which had rejected a reassessment notice issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act for AY 2013-14.

MBBS Seat Row: Delhi High Court Quashes Executing Court's Order Compelling Jamia Hamdard University To Grant Consent Of Affiliation

Case Title: Jamia Hamdard Deemed to be University vs. Asad Mueed & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1744

The Delhi High Court on 17th December set aside an order dated 8th December 2025, of the Executing Court which directed Jamia Hamdard Deemed to be University to issue a Consent of Affiliation (CoA) for 150 MBBS seats at the Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences & Research (HIMSR).

Multiple-Noticee GST Cases Must Be Adjudicated By Single Commissionerate Based On Highest Demand: Delhi High Court

Case title: M/S J.K. Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Sh. Jai Kishan Bansal v. Superintendent, Delhi North, Ward-24, Zone-1, Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1745

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that in cases involving multiple noticees, adjudication has to be done by a single commissionerate, depending upon the highest monetary demand.

Delhi High Court Flags Customs' Practice Of Mentioning Communicating Officer's Name In Order Instead Of Deciding Officer

Case title: M/S Guru Kirpa Enterprises v. Office Of The Commissioner Of Customs (Export)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1746

The Delhi High Court has disapproved of the Customs Department mentioning the name of such officer in the order who communicated it to the party, instead of the officer who actually passed the order.

Delhi High Court Cancels Trademark Similar To Punjab Football Club Held By Apparel Company

Case Title: Punjab FC Private Limited v. Posshusa Apparels India Private Limited & Anr

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1747

The Delhi High Court has ordered the removal of the “PFC” trademark registered in favor of Posshusa Apparels India Private Limited, holding that the mark was deceptively similar to the trademarks of Punjab Football Club and had remained unused since its registration.

No Employer-Employee Relationship Between Principal Employer & Workman Engaged Through Contractor : Delhi HC

Case Name : Indraprastha Gas Limited vs. Ambrish Kumar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1748

A Delhi High Court Bench comprising Justice Renu Bhatnagar held that a workman engaged through a contractor is not an employee of the principal employer if the claimant fails to prove a direct employer-employee relationship with credible evidence.