Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 05 To June 11

Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 490 to 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 507NOMINAL INDEXNHAI v. Suresh Chandra 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 490NUOVOPIGNONE INTERNATIONAL SRL v. CARGO MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 491Unique Décor (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Synchronized Supply Systems Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 492MINOR K THROUGH BROTHER D v. STATE & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 493Manish Sisodia v. ED 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 494SANJAY JAIN (IN JC) v. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 495MARICO LIMITED v. DABUR INDIA LIMITED 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 496B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd v. MIST Avenue Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 497GA vs TA & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 498SHRI PAN SINGH RAWAT v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 499Indian Railway Catering & Tourism Corp. Ltd. v. M/s Goel & Goel, OMP(COMM) 299 of 2021 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 500Atishi Marlena v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 501Man Industries (India) Limited vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 502AL TAWAF HAJJ AND UMRAH TRAVEL AND TOURISM v. UNION OF INDIA and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 503SHARAFAT KHAN & ANOTHER v. NORTHERN RAILWAY & ANOTHER 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 504Shivam Chaudhary & Ors. vs All India Council for Technical Education & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 505Travelport International Operations Limited United Kingdom Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation 3 N.Delhi & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 506EUREKA FORBES LIMITED (FORMERLY FORBES ENVIRO SOLU v. FLIPKART INTERNET PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 507ORDERS/JUDGEMENTS ‘Partial Reduction In Traffic’ Due To Remote Event Of Flood Is Not A Force Majeure Event, Delhi High Court Sets Aside The Award Against NHAICase Title: NHAI v. Suresh ChandraCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 490The Delhi High Court has held that ‘partial reduction in traffic’ due to a remote event of flood is not a force majeure event.Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that force majeure event contemplates a complete blockade of the road due to the floods and not mere reduction of the traffic on a particular road.The Court set aside an arbitration award passed against NHAI on the ground that the interpretation adopted by the Arbitral Tribunal was contrary to the intent of the parties, therefore, the award would be vulnerable to challenge for being contrary to contractual provisions and would fall within the scope of Section 34(2)(b)(ii) of the Act.A Consent Foreign Award Is Enforceable Under The New York Convention: Delhi High CourtCase Title: NUOVOPIGNONE INTERNATIONAL SRL v. CARGO MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANRCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 491The Delhi High Court has held that a consent foreign award is enforceable under the New York Convention/Part II of the A&C Act, 1996.Justice Yashwant Varma held rejected the argument that consent arbitration award do not fall within the rubric of New York Convention. The Court rejected the argument that an award to be recognized under the Convention must be one based on adjudication as arbitration presupposes adjudication by the tribunal and any award incorporating the settlement agreement entered into by the parties during the pendency of the proceedings would not amount to an award.Extension Of Period Of Agreement By Written Communications, No Novation, The Arbitration Clause Continues To Be Operative: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Unique Décor (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Synchronized Supply Systems Ltd.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 492The Delhi High Court has held that if the parties have, by written communications, extended the period of agreement, the arbitration clause that was a part of the agreement continues to be operative.The bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Amit Mahajan has distinguished between the situations wherein an arbitration clause expires with the novation of the main agreement and when the arbitration clause continues to be operative when the original agreement is not superseded by any other agreement but extended by the parties through written communications.Delhi High Court Orders Shifting Of 14-Yr-Old To Children's Home For Safe Delivery After Refusal To Undergo Medical Termination Of PregnancyTitle: MINOR K THROUGH BROTHER D v. STATE & ANRCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 493The Delhi High Court has recently ordered shifting of a 14-year-old pregnant minor to a children's home for girls for safe delivery of the child after she and her guardian brother refused to agree to medical termination of her pregnancy.Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani was hearing a plea moved by the minor through her 22-year-old brother seeking medical termination of her 28 weeks old pregnancy.The minor got pregnant as a result of physical relations between her and the accused in the FIR registered under sections 366A and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.Liquor Policy: Delhi High Court Denies Interim Bail To Manish Sisodia In Money Laundering CaseTitle: Manish Sisodia v....

Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 05 To June 11

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags