Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 12 To May 18, 2025

Citations 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 535 to 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 576

NOMINAL INDEX

Arun Kumar Jindal v. CBI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 535

M/S Mahesh Fabrinox Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 536

Anjali Birla v. X Corp. and Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 537

Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pvt Ltd. v. MMTC Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 538

Goethe-Institut E.V. v. Abhishek Yadav & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 539

Abros Sports International Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashish Bansal And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 540

Mukesh Kumar Garg v. UoI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 541

Praveen Kumar v. Pooja Arya 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 542

RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS RAJE v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 543

Crystal Crop Protection Limited v. Safex Chemicals India Limited & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 544

Sanser Pal Singh v. UOI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 545

Anand Mishra v. UOI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 546

M/S A. G. Overseas Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Chetan Dass 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 547

Upendra Nath Dalai v. UOI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 548

AMIT SAHNI v. UNION OF INDIA (MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE) THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 549

Mr. Piruz Khambatta & Anr. v. Franchise India Brands Limited & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 550

Hindustan Construction Company Ltd v. Indian Strategic Petroleum Reserves Ltd. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 551

Romil Gupta Trading As Sohan Lal Gupta v. Registrar Of Trade Marks & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 552

ANSHUL v. STATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 553

LAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI v. SAKET GOKHALE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 554

Shamikh Shahbaz Shaikh v. State Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 555

Dinesh Aneja v. State Through Government Of NCT Of Delhi 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 556

Mankind Pharma Limited v. Zhejiang Yige Enterprise Management Group Co. Ltd. & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 557

Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd v. The Controller Of Patents 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 558

ADITI CHATTERJEE v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY AND ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 559

ANUSHA GUPTA & ORS v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY (THROUGH THE DIRECTOR) & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 560

RAJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY v. STATE 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 561

MANIDEEP MAGO v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 562

A. S. ISMAIL v. NIA 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 563

DR. RANDHAWA ULTRASONOGRAPHY IMAGING AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE & Ors v. STATE OF NCT, DELHI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 564

UNION OF INDIA Versus M/S GR-GAWA R(J.V.) 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 565

SP v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 566

Khushi Sharma v. Union Of India And Others 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 567

M/S Rhine Power Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/S Ramprastha Promoters And Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 568

Eureka Forbes Limited (Formerly Forbes Enviro Solutions Limited) v. Nandan Sales And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 569

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus M/S NARAINDAS R ISRANI 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 570

Western Digital Technologies Inc. & Anr. v. Hansraj Dugar 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 571

RINKOO AGGARWAL versus GAURAV SABHARWAL & ANR.

Citati 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 572

M.V. Omni Projects (India) Ltd. v. Union of India through Chief Engineer Northern Railways & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 573

FOUNDATION FOR INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM V/s AMITA SINGH and connected matter 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 574

JASMINE SHAH v. DIRECTOR (PLANNING) GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 575

UNION OF INDIA Versus AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD. 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 576

S.17A PC Act | If Information About More Offenders Is Found During Trap Proceeding, CBI Can't Be Rendered Helpless In Continuing Probe: Delhi HC

Case title: Arun Kumar Jindal v. CBI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 535

The Delhi High Court refused anticipatory bail to a Senior Section Engineer of the Railways, who was hauled up in a corruption case following trap proceedings conducted on co-accused.

GST | Delhi HC Rebukes Trend Of Persons Who Wrongfully Avail ITC By Invoking Writ Jurisdiction; Imposes ₹1 Lakh Cost

Case title: M/S Mahesh Fabrinox Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 536

The Delhi High Court has criticized the “pattern” of persons, who either availed fraudulent Input Tax Credit or enabled the availment of fraudulent ITC, invoking Court's writ jurisdiction to challenge orders imposing penalty under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Act 2017, on technical grounds.

Relief To Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla's Daughter: Delhi HC Directs Google, X To Remove 'Defamatory' Posts Doubting Her UPSC Qualification

Title: Anjali Birla v. X Corp. and Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 537

The Delhi High Court closed the defamation suit filed by IRPS Officer and Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla's daughter, Anjali Birla, against social media posts alleging that she cleared UPSC exam in her first attempt by indulging in corrupt practices and misusing her father's position.

No Objections U/S 47 Of CPC Can Be Moved By Judgment Debtor Against Execution Of Award U/S 36 Of A&C Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title – Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pvt Ltd. v. MMTC Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 538

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has observed that a judgment debtor is not entitled to move objections under Section 47, CPC in an application for execution of award under Section 36, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) as it would amount to effectively opening a second round for challenging the Award which would undermine the provision of section 34 i.e. challenge to Award on limited grounds and go against the intent of ACA.

Rights Of Prior User Prevail Over Registered Trademark Holder: Delhi HC Grants Interim Relief To German Society's Institutes In India

Case title: Goethe-Institut E.V. v. Abhishek Yadav & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 539

Reaffirming the principle that rights of prior user are superior to that of a proprietor holding a registered trademark, the Delhi High Court granted interim injunction in favour of Goethe-Institut, a German society which runs six educational institutes in India in the name of 'Max Mueller Bhavan', offering German language courses.

Can Suit For Infringement Lie Against Proprietors Of Registered Trademark? Delhi High Court Refers Issue To Larger Bench

Case title: Abros Sports International Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashish Bansal And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 540

The Delhi High Court has referred to a larger the following questions of law in relation to trademark infringement:

“(i) Whether a suit for infringement can lie against the proprietor of a registered trademark, with respect to the use of such trademark?

(ii) Whether, assuming such a suit can lie, the Court can pass any interlocutory order, injuncting the use, by the defendant, of the allegedly infringing registered trademark?

Rampant Misuse Of S.16 GST Act For Wrongful Availment Of ITC Will Create 'Enormous Dent' In GST Regime: Delhi High Court

Case title: Mukesh Kumar Garg v. UoI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 541

The Delhi High Court has once again flagged concerns over rampant misuse of Section 16 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 by traders, for wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit.

Wife Leaving Job To Care For Child Not Voluntary Abandonment Of Work, Entitled To Maintenance: Delhi High Court

Case title: Praveen Kumar v. Pooja Arya

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 542

The Delhi High Court has held that a wife cannot be denied maintenance merely because she is qualified and was employed, if she was compelled to quit to take care of the child.

Prolonged Incarceration Undermines Right To Life, Conditional Liberty Must Override Bail Restrictions Under MCOCA: Delhi High Court

Title: RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS RAJE v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 543

The Delhi High Court has ruled that conditional liberty must override the statutory restrictions on grant of bail under Section 21 of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).

'Complete Specification' Of Invention In Patent Is Sacrosanct To Determine Case Of Infringement: Delhi High Court

Case title: Crystal Crop Protection Limited v. Safex Chemicals India Limited & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 544

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the 'Complete Specification' of an invention is sacrosanct for determining infringement of its patent.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Alleging Deaths Due To Negligence In Construction Activities, Cites Lack Of Specific Pleadings

Title: Sanser Pal Singh v. UOI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 545

The Delhi High Court refused to entertain a public interest litigation alleging that deaths were being caused in the national capital due to negligence in constructions here.

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL On Overcrowding Of Tihar Jail, Asks Litigant To Approach Appropriate Authorities

Title: Anand Mishra v. UOI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 546

The Delhi High Court rejected a public interest litigation highlighting the issue of overcrowding of Tihar jail in the national capital.

Order VII Rule 1 CPC | Time Limit To File Written Statement Not Applicable For Filing Reply To Amended Plaint: Delhi High Court

Case title: M/S A. G. Overseas Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Chetan Dass

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 547

The Delhi High Court has held that the 120 days time-limit prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure for filing of written statement by a defendant does not apply to the party while filing reply to an amended plaint.

'There Has To Be Some Limit To Frivolity': Delhi High Court Raps Litigant For Filing PIL Calling BNS A 'Criminal Act' Of Government

Title: Upendra Nath Dalai v. UOI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 548

The Delhi High Court rapped a litigant for filing a public interest litigation alleging that the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 which replaced the erstwhile Indian Penal Code of 1860, is a “criminal act” of the Government of India.

'Authorities Are Alive To The Situation': Delhi High Court Closes PIL Seeking Expeditious Filling Of Judicial Vacancies

Title: AMIT SAHNI v. UNION OF INDIA (MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE) THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 549

The Delhi High Court closed a PIL seeking expeditious filling of the judicial vacancies in the Court by elevating eligible District Judges and Advocates from the Bar.

Delhi High Court Issues Ex-Parte Interim Injunction On Piruz Khambatta's Plea Against Unauthorised Use Of 'Rasna'

Case title: Mr. Piruz Khambatta & Anr. v. Franchise India Brands Limited & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 550

The Delhi High Court issued an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of Piruz Khambatta, Chairman of Rasna Group and Ambassador of the government's Make In India initiative, on his plea against Franchise India Brands Limited.

When Deciding Application For Appointment Of Arbitrator, Court Cannot Examine Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata: Delhi High Court

Case Title – Hindustan Construction Company Ltd v. Indian Strategic Petroleum Reserves Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 551

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jyoti Singh has observed that it is not open to the referral court in a petition filed under Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) to examine the issue whether the claim is barred by res judicata. Such an examination falls within the domain of the Arbitral Tribunal.

Timelines Under Rule 100 Of Trade Marks Rules 2017 Are Mandatory, Cannot Be Waived: Delhi High Court

Case title: Romil Gupta Trading As Sohan Lal Gupta v. Registrar Of Trade Marks & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 552

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the one-month notice period mentioned under Section 100 of the Trademarks Rules 2017 before the Registrar can initiate rectification of register, is mandatory and cannot be waived.

[Dowry Death] Mere Suspicion Of Extramarital Affair Without More Not Enough For Abetment Of Suicide: Delhi High Court

Title: ANSHUL v. STATE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 553

While granting bail to a husband in a dowry death case, the Delhi High Court held that mere suspicion of extramarital affair or strained relations without more is not enough to invoke the charge of abetment of suicide.

Delhi High Court Directs Saket Gokhale To Publish Apology For Defaming Lakshmi Puri

Title: LAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI v. SAKET GOKHALE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 554

The Delhi High Court has directed Trinamool Congress MP Saket Gokhale to publish the apology for defaming Lakshmi Puri, former Indian Assistant Secretary-General to the United Nations, as directed by a single judge last year.

Online Part-Time Job Scam: Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Accused, Says Custodial Interrogation Needed To Uncover Conspiracy

Case title: Shamikh Shahbaz Shaikh v. State Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 555

The Delhi High Court denied anticipatory bail to an agent of fintech Rapipay, allegedly involved in duping a man of ₹17,95,000/- in an online part-time job scam.

Failure To Comply With Conditions Imposed By Court While Permitting Undertrial To Leave Country Can't Be Taken Lightly: Delhi High Court

Case title: Dinesh Aneja v. State Through Government Of NCT Of Delhi

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 556

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a Sessions Court order forfeiting the fixed deposit of a rape accused, as he failed to intimate on affidavit his itinerary for foreign travel which was allowed by the Sessions Court during pendency of trial.

Registration Of Trademark In Other Countries Doesn't By Itself Entitle Party To Its Registration In India: Delhi High Court

Case title: Mankind Pharma Limited v. Zhejiang Yige Enterprise Management Group Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 557

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that registration of a trademark in other countries does not by itself entitle registration of the said mark in India.

Controller Of Patents Must Specify Known Substance Against Which Claimed Invention Is Being Assessed In Hearing Notice: Delhi High Court

Case title: Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd v. The Controller Of Patents

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 558

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the Controller of Patents must clearly specify in the hearing notice the 'known substance' against which the claimed invention of an applicant is being assessed.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Disciplinary Proceedings Against JNU Student Over Protest On 2017 Women's Hostels Raids

Title: ADITI CHATTERJEE v. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 559

The Delhi High Court has set aside disciplinary proceedings against a resident student of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) initiated over protest on allegedly illegal raids conducted at the women's hostels in 2017.

JEE-Main: Delhi High Court Orders CFSL Probe In Plea Alleging Manipulation Of Score Cards

Title: ANUSHA GUPTA & ORS v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY (THROUGH THE DIRECTOR) & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 560

The Delhi High Court has ordered investigation by Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), CBI, in a petition filed by two candidates alleging manipulation of their score cards in JEE (Main)-2025.

'Broad Daylight Violence': Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Lawyer In Road Rage Case, Says All Equal In Eyes Of Law

Title: RAJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY v. STATE

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 561

The Delhi High Court has denied anticipatory bail to a lawyer accused of causing serious injuries to a man in a road rage case, emphasizing that all are equal in the eyes of law and none can be treated as more equal.

FEMA Does Not Grant Immunity For Offences Under IPC, Both Statutes Address Different Infractions: Delhi High Court

Title: MANIDEEP MAGO v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS and other connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 562

The Delhi High Court has observed that Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, does not grants to a person immunity for offences committed under the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Condition Has Improved In Jail: Delhi High Court Denies Interim Bail To PFI Leader On Medical Grounds

Title: A. S. ISMAIL v. NIA

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 563

The Delhi High Court has denied interim bail to Popular Front of India (PFI) leader AS Ismail booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, observing that his medical condition has significantly improved.

[Sex Determination] Offences Under PCPNDT Act Cognizable, Registration Of FIR Not Barred Under Law: Delhi High Court

Title: DR. RANDHAWA ULTRASONOGRAPHY IMAGING AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE & Ors v. STATE OF NCT, DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 564

The Delhi High Court has held that the offences under the Pre-Conception & Pre Natal Diagnostic Technique (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, are cognizable and registration of FIR and investigation by the Police under the enactment, per se, is not barred under law.

[Arbitration] Initial Filing Without Essential Documents Non Est In Law, Limitation Can't Be Circumvented By Curing Defects: Delhi High Court

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA Versus M/S GR-GAWA R(J.V.)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 565

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has held that an initial filing made without the essential documents like attaching impugned award etc. required for adjudication is non est in law and has no legal existence. Such a filing, made merely to evade the limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) cannot be considered valid.

Medical Standards For Appointment Decided By Forces, Aspirants Can't Seek Parity With Other Paramilitary Forces/Army: Delhi High Court

Case title: SP v. Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 566

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that medical standards to be met for appointment in an armed force are decided by the respective forces and there can be no question of parity among different forces.

[S.173 BNSS] High Court Slams Delhi & UP Cops For "Passing The Buck", Says Police Can't Refuse To Register FIR Based On Jurisdiction

Case title: Khushi Sharma v. Union Of India And Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 567

The Delhi High Court today expressed “serious consternation” and “regret” at the conduct of both the Delhi Police and the Uttar Pradesh Police in failing to register an FIR regarding the mysterious death of a 20-year-old Delhi resident in Greater Noida.

Contempt Court Can Reverse Benefits Obtained From Disobeying Orders U/S 9 & 17 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Case Title:M/S Rhine Power Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/S Ramprastha Promoters And Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 568

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Anish Dayal has held that the contempt court is empowered to issue directions to reverse any benefits obtained in disobedience of an order passed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) to ensure that parties are restrained from violating the court's orders.

Delhi High Court Awards Damages To Eureka Forbes Over Counterfeiting Of Aquaguard Spare Parts

Case title: Eureka Forbes Limited (Formerly Forbes Enviro Solutions Limited) v. Nandan Sales And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 569

The Delhi High Court has granted a permanent injunction in favour of home appliance manufacturer Eureka Forbes, against counterfeiting of the spare parts and consumables of its famous Aquaguard.

Arbitrator's Decision To Choose Internationally Recognised Formula Based On Expertise For Computing Damages Can't Be Faulted: Delhi High Court

Case Title: DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus M/S NARAINDAS R ISRANI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 570

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has held that different formulae may be applied depending on the circumstances, and the choice of method for computing damages falls within the arbitrator's discretion. Sections 55 and 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (Contract Act) do not prescribe any specific formula for the calculation of damages. Therefore, the arbitrator's decision to apply any internationally recognized method, based on their expertise, cannot be faulted.

Any Person Has Right To Legally Import Second Hand Goods Bearing Trademark Of An Entity And Sell Them: Delhi High Court

Case title: Western Digital Technologies Inc. & Anr. v. Hansraj Dugar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 571

“Any person in India has the right to legally import goods from abroad bearing the trademarks of an entity and sell the same in India,” the Delhi High Court has held.

Limitation For Application U/S 11(6) Of Arbitration Act Can't Be Bypassed By Claiming Advocate Was Not Authorised To Issue Notice: Delhi High Court

Case Title: RINKOO AGGARWAL versus GAURAV SABHARWAL & ANR.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 572

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jyoti Singh has held that the bar of limitation for filing an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) seeking the appointment of an arbitrator, cannot be circumvented merely on the ground that the demand-cum-arbitration invocation notice was issued by the petitioner's counsel without proper authorization. The court held that such a contention, if accepted, would render the limitation period for filing such applications meaningless and defeat the very purpose of prescribing a time frame.

Waiver To Section 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Has To Be Given After Constitution Of The Tribunal: Delhi High Court

Case Title – M.V. Omni Projects (India) Ltd. v. Union of India through Chief Engineer Northern Railways & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 573

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has observed that the party giving no-objection to the applicability of Section 12(5), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) has to give such no-objection after the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal. The waiver to applicability has to be done after the arbitrators are appointed with the names and details. The Court also observed that any waiver before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal is no waiver in the eyes of law.

Delhi High Court Rejects Plea By 'The Wire' Against Summoning Order Passed In Ex-JNU Professor's Defamation Complaint

Case title : FOUNDATION FOR INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM V/s AMITA SINGH and connected matter

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 574

The Delhi High Court has rejected the pleas moved by Foundation of Independent Journalism, which runs the media platform 'The Wire', and its editor Ajoy Ashirwad Mahaprastha challenging an order summoning them on a criminal defamation case filed by former JNU professor Amita Singh.

AAP Leader Jasmine Shah Withdraws From Delhi High Court Plea Against Removal From DDCD Post

Title: JASMINE SHAH v. DIRECTOR (PLANNING) GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 575

Aam Aadmi Party leader Jasmine Shah withdrew from the Delhi High Court his petition filed against his removal from the post of Vice Chairperson of Dialogue and Development Commission of Delhi (DDCD) in 2022.

No Damages For Loss Of Profit In Absence Of Proof Of Missed Profitable Ventures Due To Delay In Contractual Payment: Delhi High Court

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA Versus AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 576

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Tejas Karia has held that unless it is demonstrated that the delay in payment for the completion of the work contract prevented the contractor from undertaking other profitable ventures, damages for loss of profits cannot be awarded.