Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049NOMINAL INDEXUniversity of Delhi v. Neeraj and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012 Bhupinder Kumar Malik v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1013 M/S ECG Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1014 Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1015 X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw...
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049
NOMINAL INDEX
University of Delhi v. Neeraj and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012
Bhupinder Kumar Malik v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1013
M/S ECG Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1014
Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1015
X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1016
SUSHANT RAJ v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1017
Manish Goel HUF v. The Commissioner Delhi Goods And Services Tax Trade And Tax Department New Delhi And Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1018
Gujarat State Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd. v. M/S Gail (India) Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1019
Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1020
Omega QMS v. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1021
Ashiya v. Commissioner of Customs 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1022
Lakhveer Singh v. NIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1023
Rahimullah Rahimi v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1024
X v. STATE (NCTD) AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1025
Praveen @ Lallu v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1026
YASH MISHRA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1027
Tata Sons Pvt Ltd v. John Doe 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1028
Deepak Sain v. State NCT of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1029
Samyak Jain v. Superintendent (Adjudication), Central Gst Delhi & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1030
Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1031
Surender Bajaj v. Dinesh Chand Gupta and Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1032
Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1033
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS v. SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1034
Commissioner Of Income Tax-Tds-01 v. Diamond Tree 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1035
ASHWANI KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1036
HAVELI RESTAURANT AND RESORTS LTD v. ADISON RESORTS LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1037
Soni Devi v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1038
Abdul Malik Alias Parvez v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1039
XX v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1040
Tanvi Chaturvedi v. Smita Shrivastava & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1041
ANJALI & ANR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1042
Ankush Kumar Parashar v. Sapna @ Mona & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1043
Union Of India And Ors vs Ex Wo Om Prakash Retd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1044
ALTAF v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1045
Ashok Babu v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1046
Pramiti Basu v. Secretary General Supreme Court Of India (and batch) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1047
MS. ARCHANA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1048
Burger King Corporation vs. Swapnil Patil & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049
Delhi High Court Sets Aside CIC Order Directing Disclosure Of Information On PM Modi's Degree
Title: University of Delhi v. Neeraj and other connected matters
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1012
The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Delhi University (DU) to disclos information with respect to the bachelor's degree of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Justice Sachin Datta allowed DU's plea filed in 2017 against CIC's order which allowed inspection of records of the students who had passed BA programme in 1978, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is also stated to have cleared the examination. The order was stayed on the first date of hearing on January 24 in 2017.
Case title: Bhupinder Kumar Malik v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1013
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that an employee cannot claim right to antedating of promotion merely because he was promoted at a later point in time, keeping the vacant post unfilled without providing reasons.
Case title: M/S ECG Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Customs
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1014
The Delhi High Court has expressed concern over alleged import of counterfeit iPhones, stating that such imports not only affect brand owners but also adversely affect consumer welfare— as old and used products could get re-branded as new ones.
Case title: Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1015
The Delhi High Court has held that investors, who gamble their money with impractical promises of “unbelievably high returns”, must own their risks instead of running to the State and crying foul when they face loss.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1016
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a woman's right to reside in a shared household under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act cannot act as a sword to create proprietary rights.
Title: SUSHANT RAJ v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1017
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the offences of domestic violence with the intention to kill must be viewed with seriousness and marital relationship is not a mitigating factor in such cases.
Case title: Manish Goel HUF v. The Commissioner Delhi Goods And Services Tax Trade And Tax Department New Delhi And Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1018
The Delhi High Court expressed its disapproval with the GST Department for rejecting a trader's application for retrospective cancellation of his GST registration on medical grounds, and later cancelling his registration with retrospective effect.
Case Name: Gujarat State Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd. v. M/S Gail (India) Ltd.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1019
The Delhi High Court, while dismissing a Section 34 petition, observed that the five contracts entered into between the parties were subject to the restrictions imposed by the Government. By providing the gas at a subsidised price, the Government has the authority to regulate the use of such gas.
Case title: Yogesh Singh v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1020
The Delhi High Court has held that inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 are available to it even if the bail plea preferred before it stands disposed of.
Case title: Omega QMS v. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1021
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the power to withhold refund under Section 54(11) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 cannot be exercised by the Department in absence of an appeal against the refund order.
Case title: Ashiya v. Commissioner of Customs
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1022
The Delhi High Court has granted relief to a Muslim woman whose gold bangles were seized by the Customs Department on return from Mecca and were withheld despite an order of the Adjudicating Authority, directing release.
Case title: Lakhveer Singh v. NIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1023
The Delhi High Court denied bail to a UAPA accused, booked for supplying arms and ammunition to the Bambiha Gang, in furtherance of alleged conspiracy to commit terrorist activities in the country, particularly the national capital.
Case title: Rahimullah Rahimi v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1024
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that the non-filing of Forensic Science Laboratory Report in a drugs case does not vitiate the chargesheet and the accused cannot claim it as a ground to seek default bail.
Title: X v. STATE (NCTD) AND ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1025
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and 10 year sentence of a father for raping his 9 year old minor daughter repeatedly every night in 2017.
Case title: Praveen @ Lallu v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1026
The Delhi High Court has held that a single person can be convicted for the offence of gang rape punishable under Section 376DA IPC (Section 70 BNS), even if the co-offender manages to escape trial.
Title: YASH MISHRA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1027
The Delhi High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 193(9) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, saying that the provision does not act as a camouflage to an accused's right to default bail.
Case title: Tata Sons Pvt Ltd v. John Doe
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1028
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim dynamic injunction, protecting the trademark of Tata Group's payment solutions platform Tata Pay.
Case title: Deepak Sain v. State NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1029
The Delhi High Court has reduced the sentence of 3 months imprisonment imposed upon a POCSO convict after 10 years of trial, stating that it cannot “uproot” him from the society after a decade.
Case title: Samyak Jain v. Superintendent (Adjudication), Central Gst Delhi & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1030
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that allegations of misuse of a trader's GST identification number by a third party cannot be probed by the GST Department.
Case title: Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1031
The Delhi High Court has held that “no injunction can be granted even in the case of passing off against a defendant, restraining the use by her, or him, of her, or his, own name.”
Case Name: Surender Bajaj v. Dinesh Chand Gupta and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1032
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, while dismissing a Section 11 petition under the A&C Act, observed that dismissing a Section 8 application under the A&C Act amounts to res judicata. The Section 11 Court cannot refer the parties to Arbitration if the order dismissing Section 8 is not set aside or interfered with.
Use Of Full Name Not Mandatory To Avail Protection U/S 35 Trademarks Act: Delhi High Court
Case title: Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v. Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1033
The Delhi High Court has held that the benefit of Section 35 of the Trade Marks Act 1999, which proscribes any injunction being granted against the use by the defendants of his/ her name as a trademark, is not restricted to use of full name by the defendant.
Title: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS v. SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1034
The Delhi High Court has dismissed Central Government's plea against a direction to grant promotion to IRS officer Sameer Wankhede if he is found suitable by the UPSC.
Case title: Commissioner Of Income Tax-Tds-01 v. Diamond Tree
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1035
The Delhi High Court has held that the Common Area Maintenance Charge (CAM) paid by a showroom owner to the mall does not qualify as 'rent' and is not liable to TDS under Section 194I of the Income Tax Act 1961.
Title: ASHWANI KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1036
The Delhi High Court has held that a Hindu marriage cannot be dissolved by signing a marriage dissolution deed in front of villagers or “social people and witnesses.”
Title: HAVELI RESTAURANT AND RESORTS LTD v. ADISON RESORTS LIMITED
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1037
Ruling in favour of famous Haveli Restaurant and Resorts, the Delhi High Court has recently asked a Ludhiana based company running under the name “Punjabi Haveli” to refrain from using “Haveli” marks and to remove its advertisements or listings from third party websites.
Case title: Soni Devi v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1038
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a wife cannot be denied family pension upon her husband's death, merely because they had an ongoing matrimonial dispute.
Case title: Abdul Malik Alias Parvez v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1039
“Merely because American ganja is more expensive than Indian ganja, culpability does not increase in the former,” the Delhi High Court has held.
Case title: XX v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1040
The Delhi High Court has held that working 'for' an organization cannot be equated with working 'in' an organization”, and 'employment' and 'empanelment' are to be treated differently when interpreting recruitment rules.
Case title: Tanvi Chaturvedi v. Smita Shrivastava & Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1041
The Delhi High Court has held that it is not only necessary but mandatory to implead the alleged paramour of one's spouse when seeking divorce on the ground of adultery.
Students Contesting DUSU Polls Need Not Deposit Rs. 1 Lakh Bond: Delhi High Court Clarifies
Title: ANJALI & ANR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1042
The Delhi High Court has clarified that the students contesting the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) Elections, 2025, need not deposit the bond of Rs. 1 lakh, which was imposed as a precondition by the varsity.
Case title: Ankush Kumar Parashar v. Sapna @ Mona & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1043
The Delhi High Court, while reducing the quantum of maintenance granted to a man's wife and child, took into consideration his financial obligations like home loan and responsibility towards his parents.
Disability Attributable To Military Service; Burden To Rebut Lies On Employer : Delhi HC
Case. : Union Of India And Ors vs Ex Wo Om Prakash Retd
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1044
A Division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that a member of the armed forces is presumed to be in sound health at the time of entry into service; therefore, if a disability such as Primary Hypertension arises during service and was not noted at entry, it is presumed to be attributable to or aggravated by military service. The burden lies on the employer to rebut this presumption with clear reasons. Further the disability pension being a beneficial provision, must be interpreted liberally.
Title: ALTAF v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1045
The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 10,000 costs on an accused who sought quashing of a POCSO case registered against him on the ground that it was in the interest of the minor victim who would otherwise would face social stigma.
Case title: Ashok Babu v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1046
The Delhi High Court has held that merely standing guard or omitting to act when someone else commits an offence in furtherance of their common intention would be sufficient to attract liability under Section 34 IPC.
Case title: Pramiti Basu v. Secretary General Supreme Court Of India (and batch)
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1047
The Delhi High Court dismissed a batch of pleas filed by candidates aspiring for the post of Junior Court Assistant (JCA) at the Supreme Court, over their exclusion from the recruitment process.
Title: MS. ARCHANA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1048
The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Government to appoint a woman candidate on the post of Air Force Pilot, observing that we are no longer in the times in which discrimination could be made between male and female candidates for entering into the Armed Forces.
Delhi High Court Blocks Fraudulent Websites Collecting Money Under 'Burger King' Trademark
Case title: Burger King Corporation vs. Swapnil Patil & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1049
The Delhi High Court has observed that the illegal use of “Burger King” trademark or collecting money under the name of the American multinational fast food restaurant chain is not permitted.