NISHITH.TV
  • Mumbai
  • Silicon Valley
  • Bengaluru
  • Singapore
  • Mumbai BKC
  • New Delhi
  • Munich
  • New York

Locations

  • Mumbai
  • Silicon Valley
  • Bengaluru
  • Singapore
  • Mumbai BKC
  • New Delhi
  • Munich
  • New York
  • Content
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • NDA in the Media
  • Areas of Service
  • Research and Articles
  • Opportunities
  • Contact
  • NDACloud
  • Client Access
  • Member Access
  • Events and Calender
  • How we perform
  • Knowledge anywhere, anytime
  • See our recent deals
  • Up to date legal developments
  • Case studies in M&A

Research and Articles

HTMLPDF

  • Research at NDA
  • Research Papers
  • Research Articles
  • NDA Think Tanks
  • NDA Hotline
  • New Ali Gunjan
  • Japan Desk ジャパンデスク

NDA-Hotline


  • Debt Funding in India Series
  • Private Equity Corner
  • The Startups Series
  • Court Corner
  • Investment Funds: Monthly Digest
  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Hotline
  • Deal Destination
  • New Publication
  • M&A Interactive
  • Lit Corner
  • Private Debt Hotline
  • Food & Beverages Hotline
  • Companies Act Series
  • Gaming Law Wrap
  • Private Client Wrap
  • GIFT City Express
  • Regulatory Hotline
  • Capital Markets Hotline
  • Tax Hotline
  • Corpsec Hotline
  • Dispute Resolution Hotline
  • M&A Hotline
  • Pharma & Healthcare Update
  • Competition Law Hotline
  • HR Law Hotline
  • IP Hotline
  • Telecom Hotline
  • FEMA Hotline
  • Social Sector Hotline
  • iCe Hotline
  • SEZ Hotline
  • Media Hotline
  • Funds Hotline
  • Education Sector Hotline
  • International Trade Hotlines
  • Other Hotline
  • Real Estate Update
  • Realty Check
  • White Collar and Investigations Practice
  • Legal Update
  • IP Lab
  • Cross Examination
  • Technology & Tax Series
  • Technology Law Analysis
  • Yes, Governance Matters.
  • Financial Service Update
  • Japan Desk ジャパンデスク

Gaming Law Wrap

February 11, 2016

Online Poker - Update on the Gaussian Network Case

In Gaussian Network Pvt Ltd v. Monica Lakhanpal1, a District Court in New Delhi had in 2012 opined that virtual gaming portals would come within the purview of the definition of “Common Gaming House”, as they housed instruments of gaming and are only an alternative to brick and mortar casinos, and are thus prohibited. Additionally, the court also opined that even players of such online portals would be liable to penal consequences, without going into the merits of the argument.

However, this judgment is only binding on the parties to the matter as the petitioners had filed a petition under Order 36 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“CPC”). This matter is currently pending before the Delhi High Court2 by way of a revision petition and was heard by the court on January 21, 2016. The proceedings before the Delhi High Court were as follows:

  • Gaussian Network Pvt Ltd (“Petitioner”) and Monica Lakhanpal (“Respondent 1”) were present before the Delhi High Court. Respondent 1 who is a proposed investor in the Petitioner company, stated that it was also challenging the district court’s judgment. Initially, the standing counsel for State of NCT Delhi (“Respondent 2”) was not present.
  • The Petitioner argued that under every statute in relation to gaming, poker qualified as a game of skill. Also that poker remained a game of skill if it was played online or offline.
  • Interestingly, the State of NCT Delhi (“Respondent 2”) chose to make appearance and stated that it would be making arguments before the court.
  • During the course of the brief hearing, the junior counsel for Respondent 2 stated that it would be relying on KR Lakshmanan v. State of Tamil Nadu3 and Senior Electric Inspector v. Laxmi Narayan Chopra4. It is likely that Respondent 2 will be relying on this to argue that definition of a “Common Gaming House” as defined in various gaming legislations should be contemporaneously construed to include a virtual gaming portal.
  • A request for adjournment was made since the standing counsel for Respondent 2 was predisposed. The matter will be heard again on April 21, 2016.

The developments in this case, especially the line of arguments advanced by Respondent 2 would be interesting to follow. We will keep you posted as and when there are more updates.

 

– Mithun Verghis, Ranjana Adhikari & Gowree Gokhale

You can direct your queries or comments to the authors


1 Suit No 32 of 2012

2 CRP 119 of 2012

3 AIR 1996 SC 1153

4 AIR 1962 SC 159

Mission and Vision


Distinctly Different

What's New


Key Issues & Considerations for IP Centric Transactions
Research Papers: May 23,2022
Foreign investors from Mauritius likely to keep taxman at bay
Quotes : May 20,2022

Events


Webinars

Cyber Security: India Revamps Rules on Mandatory Incident Reporting & Allied Compliances
May 11,2022 - May 11,2022

This event is over. For event material please click here


Seminar

Navigating Disputes in India
February 26,2020 - February 26,2020

This event is over. For event material please click here


Round Table

Client Connect Series| Learnings from Amazon v. Future
August 26,2021 - August 26,2021

This event is over. For event material please click here

News Roundup


News Articles

Arbitration and Exchange Control Laws of India
March 31,2021

Quotes

Foreign investors from Mauritius likely to keep taxman at bay
May 20,2022

Newsletters


Dispute Resolution Hotline

Singapore Court of Appeal allows a non-party to enforce an award
May 19,2022

Regulatory Hotline

SEBI Settlement Order – Research Analysts Not to Provide Model Portfolio Products
May 18,2022

Yes, Governance Matters.

Shareholder activism: an ESG tool or a Founder's curse?
May 13,2022

  • Disclaimer
  • Content
  • Feedback
  • Walkthrough
  • Subscribe
Nishith Desai Associates@2016 All rights reserved.