Breach of Judicial Undertaking
Subject : Civil Law - Contempt and Compliance
In a firm reminder of the sanctity of judicial undertakings, the Delhi High Court has directed Galaxy Zoom India Pvt Ltd to immediately remove a published article that reportedly violated a prior assurance given to the court. The order, passed by Justice Anish Dayal, underscores the judiciary's expectation of absolute compliance with statements made by parties during ongoing litigation.
The dispute involves News Laundry Media Pvt Ltd and Galaxy Zoom India Pvt Ltd . In the initial stages of the suit on July 6, 2023, counsel for the defendants had provided a clear, unequivocal statement on behalf of the company: they would refrain from publishing, commenting on, communicating about, or issuing any material—be it a video or an article—pertaining to the ongoing dispute until the next date of hearing.
Despite this commitment to the court, the plaintiffs brought to the court's notice that in July 2024, the defendants had published an article targeting the plaintiffs’ programme, "Cutting South." The article reportedly contained allegations of corruption and accused the organizers of "distorting the map of India," directly defying the previous non-dissemination undertaking.
Upon perusing the offending article, the Delhi High Court took a serious view of the violation. Justice Anish Dayal ordered the defendants to take down the specified material from their website immediately. Furthermore, the Court has directed the defendants to file an affidavit of compliance, which must also disclose whether any other similar articles have been disseminated since the July 2023 order.
The High Court’s ruling emphasizes that court-recorded undertakings are not merely suggestions but binding directions. The following observations define the court's stance:
This order serves as a stern warning against the violation of court undertakings. The requirement to file an affidavit of compliance ensures transparency and prevents further potential breaches. The case is now listed for May 19, 2025, where the court will assess the defendants' adherence to the current directive. For legal professionals, this case reinforces the importance of meticulous adherence to interim undertakings, as the court maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward the dilution of its orders.
View the social posts created for this story.
judicial undertaking - content takedown - breach of order - digital media - legal compliance - litigation - defiance of order
#DelhiHighCourt #JudicialCompliance
Kerala High Court Adopts Calcutta Child Custody Guidelines
02 Jun 2026
High Court Upholds Acquittal in Murder Case Citing Tainted Investigation and Ante-Dated FIR
03 Jun 2026
Incorrect Statutory Provision in Bail Appeal Does Not Bar Substantive Rights: Punjab and Haryana HC Grants Bail in UAPA Case
03 Jun 2026
Merit Prevails: Rajasthan HC Protects Meritorious Candidates in Teacher Recruitment, Orders Institutional SOPs
03 Jun 2026
Broadcaster Liable for Defamatory Content if Editorial Control Exists Despite Third-Party Origin: Madras High Court
08 Jun 2026
Delhi Court Denies Bail to Cook in Hotel Fire
09 Jun 2026
Allegations of Unfair Means in Recruitment Are Serious, Cannot Quash FIR Under Section 528 BNSS: Rajasthan High Court
09 Jun 2026
Aerial Right of Way for Transmission Lines Vests with State; Individual Compensation Claims Rejected: J&K&L High Court
09 Jun 2026
Sikkim High Court Mandates Disclosure of Recruitment Exam Merit Lists Subject to No-Social-Media-Publication Undertaking
09 Jun 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.