Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: September 26 To October 2, 2022

NOMINAL INDEXCitations 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 906 TO 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 926KAUSHAL KISHOR SINGH v. M/S SITA KUONI WORLD TRAVEL INDIA LTD. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 906Sharjeel Imam vs. State 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 907BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 908RECKITT BENCKISER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 909VINAI KUMAR SAXENA v. AAM AADMI PARTY & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 910Indiabulls Housing and Finance Limited v. Enforcement Directorate 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 911PCIT Versus Panchmukhi Management Services Pvt. Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 912Canara Bank versus The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 913Facebook India Online Services Private Limited v. CCI 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 914SUGANDHI SNUFF KING PVT. LTD. & ANR. v. COMMISSIONER (FOOD SAFETY) GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI and other connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 915Chitra Ramakrishna v. CBI, Anand Subramaniam v. CBI 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 916RAJESH KUMAR v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 917Suman Jeet Agarwal v. ITO 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 918DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION v. RUBY & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 919Paras Khuttan v. GAIL India Ltd. & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 920Seema Gupta v. Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 921UNION OF INDIA & ANR v. GIRBAR SINGH & ORS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 922KANTI DEVI & ORS v. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 923SACHIN SHARMA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 924AROMATRIX FLORA PVT LTD v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 925Satyendra Kumar Jain v. ED 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 9261. Mere Emails & Form 16A Not Sufficient To Establish Employer-Employee Relationship: Delhi High Court on FreelancingTitle: KAUSHAL KISHOR SINGH v. M/S SITA KUONI WORLD TRAVEL INDIA LTD.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 906The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no master-servant relationship in freelancing as the freelancer is his own master who has the ability to pick and choose his assignments, thereby enabling him to work for himself as well as multiple employers.Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma added that a freelancer is a person who acts independently without being affiliated with or authorized by an organization and is thus distinguishable from part-time, full-time or contractual employees."Freelancer or freelancing thus are terms currently used to mean a person who is self-employed or an independent contractor in the business of selling their services and skills to different employers for a specified time period. Etymologically, freelance has derived from the words - "Free‟ a Germanic word which means to "love‟, and "lance‟ which is akin to the French word meaning to "launch‟, or discharge with force," the Court said.2. After SC Order on Sedition, Delhi High Court Asks Trial Court To Consider Sharjeel Imam's Bail Plea AfreshTitle: Sharjeel Imam vs. StateCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 907Permitting him to withdraw his application for regular bail in a 2019 sedition case, the Delhi High Court has asked the trial court to first consider former JNU student Sharjeel Imam's application seeking relief under Section 436-A CrPC on the ground that he has remained in custody for 31 months in the FIR. Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta in the order passed on September 26 asked the trial court to also take into consideration Supreme Court's order of keeping the offence of sedition in abeyance, while taking a decision on Imam's application.Imam was denied bail by a Saket Court in October 2021, saying that the tone and tenor of his 'incendiary speech' had a debilitating effect upon public tranquility, peace and harmony of the society. While his plea seeking bail was pending before High Court, Imam had recently moved an application in trial court under Section 436A.3. CCI Director General's Report Not Determinative Or Conclusive, Commission Can Consider All Aspects Before Final Decision: Delhi High CourtTitle: BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIACitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 908The Delhi High Court has said a probe report prepared by the Director General of Competition Commission of India (CCI) is neither determinative nor conclusive since it is ultimately for the Commission to take all aspects, including views that may be expressed before it, into consideration before passing final orders. Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002 provides that the Director General will submit a report on his findings after a complaint or a reference is received by it from the Commission.Justice Yashwant Varma observed that after the report of Director General comes up for consideration before CCI, it is open to any party, person or enterprise having substantial interest in the outcome of proceedings, or who is able to establish that its presence before the Commission is necessary in public interest, to seek a right of audience and present its opinion for the competition regulator's consideration. 4. [Comparative...

Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: September 26 To October 2, 2022

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags