Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 615 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 649NOMINAL INDEXNATIONAL RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & ANR. versus M/S ARDEE HI-TECH PVT. LTD. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 615 Porto Emporios Shipping Inc v Indian Oil Corporation Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 616 DR. SHAHIN NOOREYEZDAN v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 617 SDMC v. Moon Steeland General Industries Pvt. Ltd....
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 615 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 649
NOMINAL INDEX
NATIONAL RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & ANR. versus M/S ARDEE HI-TECH PVT. LTD. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 615
Porto Emporios Shipping Inc v Indian Oil Corporation Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 616
DR. SHAHIN NOOREYEZDAN v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 617
SDMC v. Moon Steeland General Industries Pvt. Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 618
SANJAY RATHORE v. STATE (GOVT OF NCT, DELHI) AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 619
Smt. Nirmala And Another v. The State And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 620
Pushkar Raj Thakur v. Google & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 621
BUREAU OF OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATIONS AND DD M/O INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING v. CANARA BANK 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 622
M/S KLA CONST TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD Versus M/S GULSHAN HOMZ PRIVATE LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 623
PRATIMA DEVI v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 624
MAHARANI BAGH CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING AND WELFARE SOCIETY LTD., & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA& ORS and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 625
GREAT EASTERN ENERGY CORPORATION LIMITED versus SOPAN PROJECTS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 626
Mukesh Kumar v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 627
ANKUR WARIKOO & ANR v. JOHN DOE & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 628
POOJA MEHTA & ORS v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 629
PHULMAI TAMANG @ NEHA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 630
RAM DEV RAI & ANR v. DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 631
FOX MANDAL AND ASSOCIATES AND ANR V/s SOMABRATA MANDAL AND ORS And SHUVABRATA MANDAL V/s SOMABRATA MANDAL& ORS. FAO (COMM)-133/2025 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 632
Rohan Basoya v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 633
Arjun Mohan & Ors v. Union of India & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 634
Nishant Gulati v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 635
Amarkant Singh Chouhan v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 636
Under Armour Inc v. Anish Agarwal & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 637
KRB Enterprises & Ors. v. M/S. KRBL Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 638
DIVYA MATTEY AND ORS v. L G GNCTD AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 639
Under Armour Inc v. Anish Agarwal & Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 640
JAMMU & KASHMIR ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION AGENCY versus M/S SIMPLEX PROJECTS LIMITED 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 641
ANI v. Mohak mangal & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 642
Sanoj Kumar Mishra v. State Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 643
SAMUEL KAMALESAN v. UNION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 644
RAVI RANJAN SINGH v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 645
TANYA AND ORS v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THR REGISTRAR and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 646
SHRI LALU PRASAD YADAV v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 647
SH. KAMTU ANURAGI & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 648
SADHGURU JAGADISH VASUDEV & ANR v. IGOR ISAKOV & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 649
Case Title: NATIONAL RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & ANR. versus M/S ARDEE HI-TECH PVT. LTD.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 615
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that there is no prescribed format for a notice invoking arbitration. The legal requirement is that the party invoking arbitration must clearly outline the disputes between the parties and state that if these disputes remain unresolved, arbitration proceedings will be initiated. The intention to resolve the disputes through arbitration must be explicitly stated in the notice.
Case Title – Porto Emporios Shipping Inc v Indian Oil Corporation Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 616
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav while allowing an application under Section 8, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) has observed that the plea of waiver of arbitration clause is a plea concerning rights in personam and does not render the dispute to be manifestly non-arbitrable. Consequently, the determination of such a plea properly falls within the jurisdictional domain of the Arbitral Tribunal itself.
Title: DR. SHAHIN NOOREYEZDAN v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 617
The Delhi High Court closed a petition filed by a doctor against locking of his Facebook account on the ground that his profile picture contained symbols, glorification or support of dangerous people and organisations.
Case title: SDMC v. Moon Steeland General Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 618
The Delhi High Court has held that the scope of an 'Industrial Building' cannot be restricted merely to traditional notions of manufacturing involving tangible and physical goods.
Title: SANJAY RATHORE v. STATE (GOVT OF NCT, DELHI) AND ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 619
The Delhi High Court said that the act of threatening or intimidating a judge, especially through gender-specific abuse, is an assault on justice itself and must be met with firm accountability.
Case title: Smt. Nirmala And Another v. The State And Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 620
The Delhi High Court has directed the District Legal Services Authority to apply their mind and give reasons while deciding the quantum of compensation to be granted under Section 357A(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Title: Pushkar Raj Thakur v. Google & Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 621
The Delhi High Court ordered take down of allegedly defamatory YouTube videos against financial educator and entrepreneur Pushkar Raj Thakur.
Title: BUREAU OF OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATIONS AND DD M/O INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING v. CANARA BANK
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 622
A single judge bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja held that the gratuity that remains unreleased at the time of an employee's death, becomes part of his estate. The court confirmed that this can also be attached against decrees passed against their legal heirs. The court clarified that Section 60(g) of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, only protects gratuity if it is received during the employee's lifetime, and not when it passes on as inheritance.
Case Title: M/S KLA CONST TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD Versus M/S GULSHAN HOMZ PRIVATE LIMITED
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 623
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has held that when an exclusive jurisdiction clause is expressly made "subject to" the arbitration clause, and the arbitration clause designates a different territorial location as the seat of arbitration, the arbitration clause prevails. In case of conflict, the jurisdiction of the court is determined by the seat designated in the arbitration agreement which overrides the exclusive jurisdictional clause mentioned in the agreement.
Delhi High Court Asks Govt To Consider Formulating Policy For Rehabilitation Of Stray Dogs
Title: PRATIMA DEVI v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 624
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government and other authorities here to consider formulating a policy for rehabilitation of stray dogs in the national capital.
Title: MAHARANI BAGH CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING AND WELFARE SOCIETY LTD., & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA& ORS and other connected matter
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 625
The Delhi High Court has taken judicial note of a newspaper report stating that over 3,000 soldiers of the Rajputana Rifles have to pass through a filthy drain every morning while marching out of their barracks for heading towards the parade ground.
Case Title: GREAT EASTERN ENERGY CORPORATION LIMITED versus SOPAN PROJECTS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 626
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that arbitral proceedings cannot remain pending for eight years without the pronouncement of an award by the learned Sole Arbitrator. While a hearing was scheduled on 17.10.2023, no reasons were provided for convening the hearing or for the prolonged delay in delivering the award. Such undue and unexplained delay defeats the very purpose of arbitration and is contrary to the public policy of India. Accordingly, the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator was terminated under section 14 of the Arbitration Act.
Title: Mukesh Kumar v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 627
The Delhi High Court refused to grant interim protection from arrest at this stage to an Ahlmad of Rouse Avenue Courts booked in a corruption case by Anti Corruption Branch (ACB).
Title: ANKUR WARIKOO & ANR v. JOHN DOE & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 628
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order and restrained unauthorised publishing and circulation of deepfake videos of YouTuber and influencer Ankur Warikoo.
Title: POOJA MEHTA & ORS v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 629
The Delhi High Court has ruled that an eviction order shall be vitiated in absence of a show cause notice under Rule 22(3)(1)(iv)(v) of the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009.
Title: PHULMAI TAMANG @ NEHA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 630
The Delhi High Court has ruled that an applicant who seeks bail on the ground of delay in trial must place on record trial court order sheets to rule out the possibility that the case was being adjourned at his or her request.
Title: RAM DEV RAI & ANR v. DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 631
The Delhi High Court has observed that encroachers cannot claim a right to continue occupying public land pending the resolution of their rehabilitation claims under the applicable policy.
Case title: FOX MANDAL AND ASSOCIATES AND ANR V/s SOMABRATA MANDAL AND ORS And SHUVABRATA MANDAL V/s SOMABRATA MANDAL& ORS. FAO (COMM)-133/2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 632
The Delhi High Court set aside a commercial court's interim order restraining Shuvabrata Mandal and Shouryabrata Mandal who run Fox Mandal and Associates from offering legal services under 'FoxMandal' trademark, which is stated to be owned by their brother Som Mandal who runs the Fox Mandal & Co.'
Absolutely Divisive': Delhi High Court Rejects PIL To Constitute 'Gujjar Regiment' In Indian Army
Title: Rohan Basoya v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 633
The Delhi High Court rejected a public interest litigation seeking a direction on the Union Government to constitute a “Gujjar regiment” in the Indian Army.
Title: Arjun Mohan & Ors v. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 634
The Delhi High Court called for a standing operating procedure (SOP) to be adopted by the Centre and Delhi Governments to implement the facilities for online processes and proceedings in various forums under the labour laws.
Title: Nishant Gulati v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 635
The Delhi High Court directed that the online applications for 'no entry permits' issued to transport vehicles plying in no entry time must be scrutinised and the documents enclosed with such applications must be verified properly.
Title: Amarkant Singh Chouhan v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 636
Amarkant Singh Chouhan, a journalist and Bhind Bureau Chief of Swaraj Express news channel, moved the Delhi High Court seeking protection from the alleged threats to his life from Madhya Pradesh police officials.
Justice Ravinder Dudeja directed the Delhi Police to grant protection to Chouhan for two months, and asked the journalist to approach the concerned High Court in the meantime for availing further legal remedies.
Case title: Under Armour Inc v. Anish Agarwal & Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 637
The Delhi High Court has held that even a momentary confusion between two competing trademarks in the mind of a consumer is sufficient to constitute trademark infringement.
Case title: KRB Enterprises & Ors. v. M/S. KRBL Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 638
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that it is not necessary that a trademark must be used in a physical form in relation to the goods.
Title: DIVYA MATTEY AND ORS v. L G GNCTD AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 639
The Delhi High Court has directed that students of Delhi Public School (DPS) Dwarka, whose names were struck down from the school rolls, shall be allowed to continue their studies, subject to the parents depositing 50% of the hiked school fee for the academic years 2024-25 onwards.
Case title: Under Armour Inc v. Anish Agarwal & Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 640
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that even though similarity in two competing trademarks cannot be ascertained by dissecting and comparing their parts, the “dominant parts” of the trademarks can be compared.
Case Title: JAMMU & KASHMIR ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION AGENCY versus M/S SIMPLEX PROJECTS LIMITED
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 641
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has held that the law mandates proof of actual loss despite the presence of an Liquidated Damages (LD) clause and does not allow automatic recovery of the entire LD amount upon breach. Therefore, the Petitioner's unilateral adjustment without adjudication was unlawful. The AT rightly held that such unilateral recovery does not obviate the need for proper adjudication of the LD claim.
Title: ANI v. Mohak mangal & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 642
The Delhi High Court on directed YouTuber Mohak Mangal to take down specific portions of his video on ANI, while hearing the news agency's defamation suit alleging that his recent video is disparaging and defamatory towards the agency.
Delhi High Court Holds Special Evening Sitting, Grants Bail To Film Director Falsely Accused Of Rape
Case title: Sanoj Kumar Mishra v. State Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 643
The Delhi High Court ordered release of film director Sanoj Mishra, falsely accused of rape by a woman with whom he had a consensual relationship.
Justice Girish Kathpalia held a special evening sitting after a Full Court reference on the occasion of superannuation of Justice Dharmesh Sharma, “keeping in mind the issue of liberty of the accused”.
Title: SAMUEL KAMALESAN v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 644
The Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of a Commanding Officer in Indian Army who refused to participate in regimental weekly religious parades on the ground that he belonged to Christian faith, despite multiple opportunities and counselling sessions at various levels by the superiors.
Title: RAVI RANJAN SINGH v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 645
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking a direction on Delhi Development Authority (DDA) not to disturb or demolish the Pakistani-Hindu refugee camp at city's Majnu Ka Tila till some alternative piece of land is allotted to the residents.
'Will Consider': Supreme Court Registrar In Pleas For Reservations In Junior Court Assistant Post
Title: TANYA AND ORS v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THR REGISTRAR and other connected matters
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 646
The Supreme Court administration told the Delhi High Court that it will decide pleas concerning the recruitment for the post of Junior Cost Assistant in the Supreme Court in various reserved categories.
Title: SHRI LALU PRASAD YADAV v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 647
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea moved by RJD Chief Lalu Prasad Yadav seeking to stay the trial court proceedings in the corruption case related to the alleged land for jobs scam case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Title: SH. KAMTU ANURAGI & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 648
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that absence of train journey ticket on the deceased person after the fatal incident cannot, by itself, negate the legitimacy of the claim for compensation.
Title: SADHGURU JAGADISH VASUDEV & ANR v. IGOR ISAKOV & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 649
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, founder of Isha Foundation, and has restrained various rogue websites and unknown entities from misusing his personality traits through the use of Artificial Intelligence in any platform or medium.