Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Supreme Court called the matter at hand a classic case in which a litigant had been able to mislead the Courts and authorities at different levels to put life into his stale claim.
Continue reading
While summarising the principles for altering conviction under Section 304 Part I of the IPC to Section 304 Part II of the IPC, the Supreme Court highlighted the difference between ‘guilty intention’ and ‘guilty knowledge’.
Continue reading
A person who defies the law and refuses to exhume the body cannot take umbrage in the delay of enforcing the law and make the Court ‘fait accompli’.
Continue reading
“The term ‘ZENITH’' even being a common English expression cannot be regarded as ‘publici juris’ in the context of services relating to education in dance.”
Continue reading
Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed the impugned FIR and its subsequent criminal proceedings by the prosecutrix aged about 17 years 10 months.
Continue reading
The defendant, Dhanpreet Singh Trading was restrained from seeking any statutory rights by applying for trade marks or copyrights in respect of the red-box device mark ‘SUPREME'.
Continue reading
Bombay High Court perused details of all 41 cases and noted that the petitioner was apparently arrested in one case and came to be arrested in other cases on transfer warrant, pleaded guilty in all 41 cases.
Continue reading
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that held that in the present circumstances, the prosecution of the petitioner for the offences under Sections 376(2)(N), 506 and 34 of IPC will amount to abuse of process of law.
Continue reading
Bombay High Court highlighted that the Gram Panchayat had already issued NOC in favour of the petitioner but passed a resolution obstructing mobile tower installation and operation based on apprehensions.
Continue reading
The present case is a classic example of frivolous and vexatious litigation, where this Court encounters incoherent and confusing stories in the name of facts and absurd reliefs. Filing such cases as the present one is doubtlessly not only frivolous and vexatious, but annoying and such a litigant must be subject to some kind of sanction.
Continue reading
When the husband had left the matrimonial home and he is residing away and there is an allegation of second marriage on the husband, the wife cannot be blamed for not taking steps to restore the conjugal rights
Continue reading
To assist the Nodal Officer, minimum secretarial staff shall be provided by the State Government.
Continue reading
In the case at hand, PVVNL had argued that the rights of electricity suppliers were not subordinate and subject to the ‘priority of claims’ mechanism under the IBC.
Continue reading
The Court observed that a person gets caste by birth and remains forever unless there are circumstances indicative of the individual having embraced not only a new order but being outcasted from the original order.
Continue reading
Delhi High Court observed that the working of the Defendant’s ‘Present and Record’ feature when compared with the Claims would demonstrate that almost all the same steps therein are present in the Defendant’s product, thus, prima facie, establishing infringement.
Continue reading
Delhi High Court directed MEA to prominently post and make accessible the SOP and Guidelines on its website, if not already available, within one week from the date of the order.
Continue reading
“The irrationality of the quantum of the costs imposed will be considered at the time of determining whether the Award should be set aside under Section 34 of the 1996 Act.”
Continue reading
HIV/AIDS patients have a right of equal treatment everywhere and they cannot be denied job opportunity or discriminated against in employment matters.
Continue reading
The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023 was promulgated just eight days after the Constitution Bench had decided on the issue of administrative control over transfers and postings of civil servants in the NCTD.
Continue reading
“A party that has made an assertion that its mark is dissimilar to a cited mark and obtains a registration based on that assertion, is not to be entitled to obtain an interim injunction against the proprietor of the cited mark, on the ground that the mark is deceptively similar.”
Continue reading