High Court Refuses To Restrain Delhi Race Club From Enforcing 'Family Unit' Cap In Horse Races

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to pass an interim order restraining the Delhi Race Club from enforcing 'family unit' cap qua the number of horses for races for Delhi Meeting 2025-2026. Justice Amit Bansal rejected the interim injunction filed by a horse owner- Ravinder Pal Singh Chauhan in his suit seeking to restrain the Club from enforcing the concept of 'family unit'. He challenged the Delhi Meeting 2025-2026 Prospectus which set out the general conditions applicable to the current horse racing season, which began on September 16 and will continue till December 30. The Delhi Race Club introduced the General Condition limiting the maximum number of horses to 40 that can be kept by a 'family unit', and that there will be a three-horse participation cap in a race applicable to a 'family unit'. It was Chauhan's case that when he tried to enter three of his horses, along with one horse of his wife in a scheduled race, the Club balloted out one of his horses. He alleged that the said act caused him immense monetary loss as well as loss to the reputation. It was submitted that the 'family unit' classification was arbitrary, irrational and discriminatory and that the clubbing of family members as a single unit violated the principles of equality.Dismissing Chauhan's interim stay application, the Court noted that the Delhi Race Club had given an explanation for the inclusion of the General Condition no.12 to the effect that it was to prevent monopolisation and potential rigging of horse races.It observed that there was a rational nexus with the objective sought to be achieved, i.e. the elimination of rigging in a horse race.“At the stage of interim injunction, when a Court is only required to take a prima facie view, I cannot find any fault with the aforesaid reasoning given on behalf of the defendant no.1. As a regulatory body, it is the responsibility of the defendants to ensure that races are conducted in a free and fair manner,” the Court said. Further, the Court noted that the appellate remedy provided under the Rules of Racing of Royal Western India Turf Club, Ltd, would be a more efficacious remedy for Chauhan, as the appeal would be heard by an expert body comprising domain experts who would have knowledge about the intricacies of the sport of horse racing.“In view of the discussion above, the plaintiff has failed to make a prima facie case for granting interim stay from restraining the defendant no.1 from enforcing the concept of 'family unit' qua number of horses or the implementation of General Condition no.12 of the Prospectus of 2025-26,” the Court said. It concluded that Chauhan failed to show that the balance of convenience was in his favour for grant of stay or that any irreparable harm or injury would be caused to him in case stay was not granted.“Needless to state, any observations made hereinabove would have no bearing on the final adjudication of the case or on the outcome of the appeal that may be filed by the plaintiff under the Rules of the defendant no.3,” the Court said. Title: RAVINDER PAL SINGH CHAUHAN v. DELHI RACE CLUB (1940) LTD AND ORSCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1598Click here to read order

High Court Refuses To Restrain Delhi Race Club From Enforcing 'Family Unit' Cap In Horse Races

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags