All High Courts
No Absolute Right Of Appeal Under SARFAESI Without Pre-Deposit: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has recently upheld the dismissal of a DRAT appeal for failure to comply with the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act. A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar held that the statutory right of appeal is conditional. The court observed that “the said right is not absolute.” The case arose after the Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed a securitisation application filed by Renu Goyal challenging measures taken by Edelweiss Asset...
Civil Courts Cannot Preempt SARFAESI Action, Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Injunction Against SBI
The Karnataka High Court has recently set aside an interim injunction that had restrained the State Bank of India from enforcing a corporate guarantee against Patel Engineering Limited. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Poonacha held that the Commercial Court in Bengaluru could not have injuncted SBI from proceeding under the SARFAESI Act or the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The bench noted that Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act bars courts from...
Gujarat High Court Quashes ₹98 Lakh GST SCN, Says Construction ITC Bar Not Applicable To Leasehold Rights Transfer
The Gujarat High Court has held that Section 17(5)(d) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which blocks input tax credit on goods or services used for construction of immovable property on one's own account, did not apply in a case where the taxpayer had only transferred leasehold rights and had undertaken no construction activity. A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi quashed a show cause notice issued under Section 74(1) of the Act and directed the...
Jurisdiction Clause In Umbrella Agreement Prevails Over Later Contract: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that when an umbrella agreement fixes a venue in one city but expressly confers jurisdiction on courts in another, the jurisdiction clause will prevail unless the parties clearly alter the juridical seat for the entire transaction. Dismissing two petitions filed by Ansal Housing Limited seeking interim relief under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar ruled that courts at Meerut, and not Delhi, had territorial...
Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Formation Of Apex Committee To Recover Agricultural Land Conversion Tax Dues
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has recently directed the State's Chief Secretary to constitute an Apex Committee to identify defaulters and recover unpaid conversion tax dues under the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Challa Gunaranjan ordered, “… we feel that steps have to be taken for ensuring recovery of the outstanding tax. We, therefore, direct the Chief Secretary of...
Delhi High Court Restrains 20 Rogue Websites Streaming Barrios vs Ryan Garcia Fight, Grants DAZN Dynamic Injunction
The Delhi High Court has recently restrained 20 rogue websites from illegally streaming the “Mario Barrios vs. Ryan Garcia” boxing match scheduled for February 21, 2026. The court held that DAZN Limited had made out a strong case for urgent protection of its exclusive broadcast rights. Granting an ex parte ad interim injunction, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed, “In such case, the plaintiffs, appears to have a prima facie strong case for an ex-parte ad-interim injunction.” The court...
Delhi High Court Asks Singer Jubin Nautiyal Why He Filed Personality Rights Suit In Delhi Despite Being Based in Uttarakhand
The Delhi High Court on Thursday asked singer Jubin Nautiyal why he had approached it for protection of his personality rights when he is based in Uttarakhand. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela questioned the choice of forum. “Why are you here? What is accessible here is accessible there. The courts there aren't abolished yet…,” the judge remarked. At the outset, the Court asked how it could entertain the suit. Nautiyal's counsel argued that key authorities such as the Ministry of Electronics and...
Waiver Under Maharashtra Settlement Of Arrears Of Tax Act Available Only On Disputed Tax: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad has recently held that under the First Phase of the Maharashtra Settlement of Arrears of Tax, Interest, Penalty or Late Fee Act, 2019, one hundred percent of undisputed tax must be paid and no waiver is available on such amount, dismissing a writ petition filed by a sugar manufacturing co-operative. A Division Bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar held, “for undisputed tax, amount to be paid is 100% of the amount in column B i.e....
Arbitration Act Is Self-Contained Code; Civil Revision Not Maintainable Where Appeal Lies: Patna High Court
The Patna High Court has reaffirmed that a civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not lie against such an order passed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where the statute provides a specific appellate remedy. The Court held that the Arbitration Act is a self-contained code and that Section 37 exhausts the appellate remedies. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya observed, “It is settled principles of law that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 being...
Delhi High Court Condones Late Filing By Avantha Holdings, Applies “Parity” Against Bank's Own Delay
The Delhi High Court on 12 February condoned a 14-day delay by Avantha Holdings Limited in filing its written statement in recovery proceedings, holding that procedural fairness requires parity when the creditor bank itself delayed service of summons by nearly a month. A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar allowed a writ petition filed by Avantha Holdings against ICICI Bank Limited, observing that a tribunal cannot ignore substantial delay by one party while...
'More The Merrier?': Delhi High Court Questions Insistence On Retaining Social Media Platforms In Karan Johar's Personality Rights Suit
The Delhi High Court on Thursday questioned the legal basis for retaining social media intermediaries as parties in filmmaker Karan Johar's personality rights suit after they have complied with its takedown directions, asking, “Why have more the merrier attitude?” Justice Jyoti Singh was hearing submissions from platforms including Meta (Defendant 15), X Corp. (Defendant 16) and Etsy (Defendant 12), which were impleaded as proforma parties in the suit. Meta informed the Court that it had...