Delhi High Court Weekly Roundup: February 28 To March 6, 2022

CITATIONS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 151 TO 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 171NOMINAL INDEXRAVNEET KAUR v. PRITHPAL SINGH DHINGRA 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 151BHARATI SHIVAJI & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 152Rashtriya Pravasi Parishad v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 153Rohit Shukla v. DGMS (Army) 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 154Nokia India Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 155SHRI MUKESH KUMAR v. SMT KAMLESH DEVI & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 156Raj Singh Gehlot v. Directorate of Enforcement 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 157Gautam Thapar v. Enforcement Directorate 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 158Abhigyan Singh v Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 159Komal Rastogi v. Directorate General Central Reserve Police Force 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 160Gaurav Dalal v. Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 161Adhir Kumar Verma v. Central Reserve Police Force & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 162Saurabh Mittal Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 163BLACK DIAMOND TRACKPARTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS v. BLACK DIAMOND MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 164SH. HARNAM DASS LUTHRA (NOW DECEASED THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS) v. USHA CHAUHAN 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 165SMT.USHA @ DURGAWATI DEVI v. SH DILIP KUMAR SINGH 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 166Avjit Saluja v. State of NCT of Delhi 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 167Aanchal Mittal & Ors. Versus Ankur Shukla 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 168X v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 169M/S. LG Electronics India Private Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 170Ram Gaua Raksha Dal v. UOI 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 171JUDGMENTS/ ORDERS1. Right Of Residence U/S 19 Of Domestic Violence Act Not Indefeasible In Shared Household When Daughter In Law Pitted Against Aged In Laws: Delhi HCCase Title: RAVNEET KAUR v. PRITHPAL SINGH DHINGRACitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 151The Delhi High Court has observed that the right of residence under Section 19 of the Domestic Violence Act is not an indefeasible right of residence in shared household, especially, when the daughter-in-law is pitted against aged father-in-law and mother-in-law."Thus, where the residence is a shared household, it does not create any embargo upon the owner to claim eviction against his daughter-in-law. A strained frictional relationship between the parties would be relevant to decide whether the grounds of eviction exist," Justice Yogesh Khanna added.The Court was dealing with an appeal challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 10.07.2018 passed in a Civil Suit.The respondent claimed to be an absolute and sole owner of the property in question vide a registered sale deed dated 27.09.2004. The respondent had originally filed a suit for eviction against the defendant (appellant herein) being his daughter-in-law.A decree of possession with damages equivalent to the market rent of the alleged illegal possession was therefore passed against the appellant and also a decree of permanent injunction to restrain her from creating any third party right in such property.2. Delhi HC Denies Relief To Artists Against Eviction From Govt Accommodations, Says Prior Inaction Not Basis To Invoke Doctrine Of Legitimate ExpectationCase Title: BHARATI SHIVAJI & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 152The Delhi High Court has observed that prior inaction cannot possibly constitute a basis for invocation of the doctrine of legitimate expectation which itself is founded on Article 14 of the Constitution.The observation came from a single bench of Justice Yashwant Varma who dismissed a bunch of petitions filed by various eminent Indian artists including dancers and musicians challenging the eviction proceedings initiated by the Centre qua government allotted residences to them. The Centre had decided to cancel the allotment subject to the allottees being granted reasonable time to vacate the premises and identify alternate accommodation." Indecisiveness of the respondents to have taken a principled decision or to take precipitate action against the petitioners earlier and once the original period of license had come to an end, cannot possibly lead to a legitimate expectation arising or operating in favour of the petitioners, " the Court said while dismissing the petitions.3. Delhi High Court Refuses To Hear Plea Against Akshay Kumar Starrer 'Prithviraj'Case Title: Rashtriya Pravasi Parishad v. Union of India & Ors.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 153The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a PIL seeking to change the title of the upcoming movie 'Prithviraj', produced by Yash Raj Films. The movie starring actors Akshay Kumar and Manushi Chillar in the lead roles is set to release on 10th June, 2022.The petitioner, Rashtriya Pravasi Parishad, submitted that the film is based on the life of Indian Emperor Prithviraj Chauhan. Advocate Sanjeev Beniwal, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the film is based on a "great warrior". However, its name is not reflective of the same.It was argued...

Delhi High Court Weekly Roundup: February 28 To March 6, 2022

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags