Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1423 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1462NOMINAL INDEXRAJIV KHOSLA v. HIGH COURT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1423 DR REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1424 COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1425 SUMIT v. STATE NCT OF DELHI...
Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1423 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1462
NOMINAL INDEX
RAJIV KHOSLA v. HIGH COURT OF DELHI & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1423
DR REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1424
COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1425
SUMIT v. STATE NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1426
X v. Y 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1427
Celina Jaitly v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1428
INFRASTRUCTURE WATCHDOG v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1429
Suparshva Swabs India v. AGN International & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1430
SATYA PRAKASH BAGLA v. STATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1431
ED v. M/S PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD & other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1432
SHASHI ARORA & ANR v. STATE THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1433
OM SARAN GUPTA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1434
PUSHKAR RAJ & ANR v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1435
Arnab Goswami v. State & Ors and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1436
MS KRRISH REALTECH PVT LTD THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECERATARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE & ANR and other connected matters 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1437
SHRAVAN GUPTA v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1438
Sabu Trade Private Limited v. Rajkumar Sabu & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1439
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA v. GEEP INDUSTRIES & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1440
Bima Sugam India Federation v. A Range Gowda & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1441
TV TODAY NETWORK LTD. & ORS v. RAMESH BIDHURI and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1442
Quantum Hi-Tech Merchandising Pvt. Ltd. v. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1443
Capital Foods Private Limited v. Damyaa (PJ) Foods Private Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1444
Hero Investcorp Pvt Ltd and Anr. v. Saklin Alias Prince 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1445
X v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1446
RENEW WIND ENERGY (AP2) PVT. LTD v. SOLAR ENERGY CORPORATION OF INDIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1447
Spice Jet v Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1448
Ronak Khatri v. State 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1449
Lotus Herbals Private Limited v. Lotus Beauty Salon Private Limited 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1450
Mohammad Talha v. M/s Karim Hotels Pvt. Ltd 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1451
DR. ADITYA SEHRAWAT v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1452
PARAG PRAKASH RUDRANGI v. STATE & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1453
RAJAT SHARMA & ANR v. TAMARA DOC & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1454
DEEPAK SRIVASTAV v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1455
Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1456
A Range Gowda v. Bima Sugam India Federation & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1457
PJ v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1458
LOKINDER SINGH PHOUGAT v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1459
NEHA MALAV v. DEAN (ADMISSIONS BRANCH), UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1460
ARKA BHATTACHARYA v. STATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1461
AANCHAL AND ANR v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1462
Title: RAJIV KHOSLA v. HIGH COURT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1423
The Delhi High Court has asked Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena to consider approving the Rules on appointment of local commissioners and receivers in the district courts in the national capital.
Title: DR REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1424
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition against the decision of Foods Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) banning Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS) labelling on drink beverages.
Title: COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1425
The Delhi High Court ruled that no student enrolled in any recognized law college university or institution in India shall be detained from taking examination or be prevented from further academic pursuits of career progression on the ground of lack of minimum attendance.
Title: SUMIT v. STATE NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1426
While granting bail to a 20 year old in a rape case, the Delhi High Court has explained the difference between false promise to marry and breach of such a promise.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1427
The Delhi High Court has observed that judicial estimation is must where there is no direct proof of income of the parties for the purpose of grant of maintenance in matrimonial cases.
Title: Celina Jaitly v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1428
The Delhi High Court disposed of a plea filed by actress Celina Jaitly seeking effective legal representation for her brother, a retired Indian Army officer, over his arrest and detention in the UAE.
The Court directed the authorities to take steps provide effective legal representation to the brother regarding his arrest and detention abroad.
Title: INFRASTRUCTURE WATCHDOG v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1429
The Delhi High Court ruled that banks acting in a "bona fide" manner, cannot be "made answerable to the judiciary" regarding the economic expediency of their decisions when no cogent material is shown.
Case Title: Suparshva Swabs India v. AGN International & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1430
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea filed by Suparshva Swabs India, the manufacturer of Tulips cotton buds and hygiene products, which sought to restrain a perfume company from using the mark “AGN TULIP.”
Title: SATYA PRAKASH BAGLA v. STATE
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1431
The Delhi High Court observed that the mere phrase “no coercive steps” does not imply stay or suspension of investigation against an individual.
Title: ED v. M/S PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD & other connected matter
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1432
The Delhi High Court ruled that the profits earned on bribe money after investment in share market amounts to proceeds of crime and is liable to be attached under the PMLA.
Title: SHASHI ARORA & ANR v. STATE THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1433
The Delhi High Court has observed that mere taunts, casual references and general family friction occurring in ordinary wear and tear of marital life is not sufficient to constitute the offence of cruelty.
Title: OM SARAN GUPTA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1434
The Delhi High Court ruled that Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860, which criminalises cruelty by a husband or his relatives toward a married woman, will be applicable even if marriage between the parties is subsequently declared invalid.
Title: PUSHKAR RAJ & ANR v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1435
The Delhi High Court has upheld Jawaharlal Nehru University's decision permitting students to vote across all constituencies- undergraduate, postgraduate and research scholar, in elections for student representatives to the Internal Committee (IC) dealing with sexual-harassment matters.
Title: Arnab Goswami v. State & Ors and other connected matters
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1436
The Delhi High Court quashed summons issued against journalist Arnab Goswami in a criminal defamation case filed against him.
Title: MS KRRISH REALTECH PVT LTD THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECERATARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE & ANR and other connected matters
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1437
The Delhi High Court has observed that the provisional attachment order (PAO) cannot be challenged in the writ jurisdiction when an alternative remedy is available under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Title: SHRAVAN GUPTA v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1438
The Delhi High Court flagged a “disturbing trend” of media reporting innocuous remarks made during the hearings “only to create sensation.”
Case Title: Sabu Trade Private Limited v. Rajkumar Sabu & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1439
The Delhi High Court upheld an interim order restraining Sabu Trade Pvt. Ltd. (STPL) and certain family members, who are also directors of the company, from using the “Sachamoti” mark, a well-known brand of sabudana (sago) products. e members of Sabu family affirming a March 2024 Single Judge order that prohibited them from using the brand and label.
Title: COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA v. GEEP INDUSTRIES & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1440
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) is not empowered to impose interest retrospectively or from a date preceding the valid service of a demand notice.\
Case Title: Bima Sugam India Federation v. A Range Gowda & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1441
The Delhi High Court in an interim order upheld its earlier direction restraining a insurance agent from using the mark “BIMA SUGAM”, a name associated with India's upcoming unified digital insurance marketplace, or any deceptively similar name, including related domain names.
Title: TV TODAY NETWORK LTD. & ORS v. RAMESH BIDHURI and other connected matter
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1442
The Delhi High Court refused to discharge TV Today Network Limited, which owns Aaj Tak and India Today group, in a criminal defamation case filed by BJP leader Ramesh Bidhuri in 2011.
Case Title: Quantum Hi-Tech Merchandising Pvt. Ltd. v. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1443
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant interim relief to Quantum Hi-Tech Merchandising Pvt. Ltd. in its trademark dispute with LG Electronics India, ruling that the company's attempt to restrain LG's use of the “Quantum” mark was undermined by its failure to disclose material information
Case Title: Capital Foods Private Limited v. Damyaa (PJ) Foods Private Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1444
In a relief for popular Desi Chinese brand Ching's Secret, the Delhi High Court restrained a UP-based food manufacturing company from using the name 'Schezwan Tufani Chutney' or any expression deceptively similar to 'Schezwan Chutney', a registered trademark of Capital Foods Pvt. Ltd.
Case Title: Hero Investcorp Pvt Ltd and Anr. v. Saklin Alias Prince
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1445
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Hero Investcorp Pvt. Ltd., restraining a Delhi-based trader from manufacturing and selling counterfeit 'Hero Genuine Oil' bottles that infringed the company's registered trademarks and bottle designs.
Title: X v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1446
The Delhi High Court has ordered that if any case is wrongly marked to a Court lacking jurisdiction before the trial courts, the file must be returned to the concerned Principal District & Sessions Judge for its fresh allocation.
Title: RENEW WIND ENERGY (AP2) PVT. LTD v. SOLAR ENERGY CORPORATION OF INDIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1447
The Delhi High Court has observed that the briefing lawyers and law firms must verify the case laws before citing them, highlighting that relying on decisions which are under review may mislead adjudicatory process.
Case Title: Spice Jet v Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1448
The Delhi High Court ruled that international workers employed in Indian companies, who are not covered by a social security scheme in their home country, must enroll in and contribute to the Employees' Provident Fund. The court rejected claims that this requirement was discriminatory or unconstitutional.
Title: Ronak Khatri v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1449
The Delhi High Court directed the Delhi Police to expedite the request made by Ronak Khatri, former President of Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU), for police protection over allegations of extortion threat by Rohit Godara gang.
Case Title: Lotus Herbals Private Limited v. Lotus Beauty Salon Private Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1450
The Delhi High Court has restrained a beauty salon from using the name “Lotus Salon” or any mark deceptively similar to Lotus, a popular personal care and cosmetics brand, observing that there was prima facie evidence of trademark infringement and passing off.
Case Title: Mohammad Talha v. M/s Karim Hotels Pvt. Ltd
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1451
The Delhi High Court ruled that while the marks “Karim's” and “Gulshan-e-Karim” are similar, a complete ban on the latter's use would be excessive. The Court has allowed a Moradabad-based restaurant to continue using its name, provided it clearly states that it has no connection with the iconic Karim's chain in Delhi.
Title: DR. ADITYA SEHRAWAT v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1452
The Delhi High Court has said that it is “inundated with petitions” on a daily basis filed by personnel in paramilitary forces challenging their transfers.
Title: PARAG PRAKASH RUDRANGI v. STATE & ANR.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1453
The Delhi High Court has observed that the character of a victim, "no matter how blemished, cannot be weaponised against her to imply consent" in rape cases.
Title: RAJAT SHARMA & ANR v. TAMARA DOC & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1454
The Delhi High Court ordered takedown of two YouTube channels hosting and circulating deepfake and fabricated videos using personality rights of senior journalist Rajat Sharma.
Title: DEEPAK SRIVASTAV v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1455
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a standing order issued by the Director General (Prisons) mandating one-year “watch period” before being eligible to be released on furlough on their return to jail after dismissal of their conviction appeals.
Title: Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1456
The Delhi High Court delivered split verdict in the plea moved by jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Engineer Rashid challenging costs imposed on him by a trial court while granting him custody parole to attend the Parliament.
Case Title: A Range Gowda v. Bima Sugam India Federation & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1457
The Delhi High Court has stayed a Single Judge's order that had directed the transfer of the domain names www.bimasugam.com and www.bimasugam.in to the Bima Sugam India Federation, pending the outcome of a trademark dispute with A. Range Gowda, a private individual and insurance agent.
Title: PJ v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1458
The Delhi High Court has ordered administrative inquiry action against two judicial officers of the national capital for their alleged role in influencing a young lawyer for influencing and coercing her to retract her allegations in a rape case filed against a lawyer.
Title: LOKINDER SINGH PHOUGAT v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1459
The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea filed by a lawyer seeking to contest elections of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana.
Title: NEHA MALAV v. DEAN (ADMISSIONS BRANCH), UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1460
The Delhi High Court has observed that it cannot pass a mandamus compelling a University to conduct a fresh round of counselling in its admission process.
Title: ARKA BHATTACHARYA v. STATE
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1461
The Delhi High Court has observed that the grant of transit bail is a short lived safeguard whose effect ceases when the jurisdiction of the competent court is invoked.
Title: AANCHAL AND ANR v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1462
The Delhi High Court has observed that inter caste unions are in the national interest and must be protected from familial or communal interference.