Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Sadhguru, Passes John Doe Order Restraining Misuse Through AI
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.Justice Saurabh Banerjee passed a dynamic+ injunction in favour of Sadhguru observing thus:“Therefore, the position of law apparent therefrom, which has since developed with the passage of...
Sadhguru Moves Delhi High Court Against Infringement Of Personality Rights By Rogue Websites, Use Of AI
Jagadish Vasudev popularly known as Sadhguru moved the Delhi High Court on Friday (May 30) in a suit seeking protection against infringement of his personality rights by rogue websites through the use of Artificial Intelligence. The counsel appearing for Sadhguru submitted before Justice Saurabh Banerjee that Sadhguru's name and likeness is being used by rogue websites to sell products. He said that Sadhguru is renowned and revered figure and a house hold name in India, arguing that...
Liquidated Damages Clause Does Not Permit Automatic Recovery Of Full Amount, Actual Loss Must Be Proven: Delhi High Court
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.Brief Facts:The impugned award arose from Contract...
Arbitration Clause Prevails Over Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause, Court At Designated Seat Retains Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court
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...
'Industrial Building' Not Limited To Manufacturing Units, Can Include IT & Software Offices For Purposes Of Property Tax: Delhi High Court
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.Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav rather held that an 'Industrial Building' encompasses IT sector businesses where non-material inputs such as data, digital content, or intellectual capital are subjected to systematic transformation or reconstitution into new intellectual property outputs, such as software, algorithms,...
Plea Of Waiving Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Examined By Referral Court U/S Of 8 A&C Act, Falls Within Domain Of Tribunal: Delhi High Court
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. Facts The instant application had...
No Fixed Format For Sending Notice U/S 21 Of A&C Act, Outlining Clear Intention To Adopt Arbitration Is Sufficient: Delhi High Court
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. Brief Facts: In the present case, Petitioners...
Fresh Cause Of Action Cannot Accrue U/S 18 Of Limitation Act If Liability Is Acknowledged After Expiry Of Period Of Limitation: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathanshankar has held that for a valid acknowledgment under section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 certain essential requirements must be met. Firstly, the acknowledgment must be made before the relevant period of limitation has expired. Secondly, it must pertain specifically to the liability concerning the right in question. Lastly, the acknowledgment must be in writing and signed by the party against whom such ...
Indo-Swiss DTAA | Period Of Reference Can't Be Excluded From Limitation U/S 153B Income Tax Act If Reference Is Invalid: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Clause (ix) of the Explanation to Section 153B of the Income Tax Act 1961 cannot be invoked to exclude the period of reference under the Indo-Swiss DTAA, if the reference itself is invalid.A division bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Tejas Karia observed,“On a plain reading of Clause (ix) of the Explanation to Section 153B of the Act, the exclusion of time taken for obtaining the information (or one year) for completion of the assessment under Section...
Income Tax Act Doesn't Contemplate Hiatus Between Handing Over & Receipt Of Documents By AO Of Non-Searched Entity: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court made it clear that Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 “does not contemplate a hiatus” between handing over and receipt of information or documents pertaining to a non-searched entity.For context, Section 153C allows the Revenue department to proceed against a party other than the person who is being searched, if incriminating articles belonging to the other person are found during the search.In terms of proviso to Section 153C, the date of search for non-searched...
'Conduct Is Disquieting To Court's Conscience': Delhi High Court Dismisses Applications For Condonation Of Delay In Filing & Re-Filing Appeal
The Delhi High Court bench of Justices C. Harishankar and Ajay Digpaul observed that the conduct of the appellants in this case is deeply troubling to the court's conscience. They neither informed the respondents about the filing of the present appeals nor disclosed the same to the court, even though the respondents' appeals challenging the same arbitral award had been listed and heard multiple times. Under these circumstances, the delay in filing and refiling the appeals cannot be...
[Arbitration] S.10 Of General Clauses Act Applies Only If S.34 Application Was Filed Within Time, Court Was Closed On Last Day Of Limitation: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul has held that the benefit of Section 10 of the General Clauses Act is available only when the petition is filed within the normal limitation period that is 90 days as prescribed under section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act and the court was closed on the last day of that period. It does not apply when the court was closed on the last day of the extendable period under proviso to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. ...