Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J. while addressing the matter of trademark infringement, opined that, “Besides, considering that parties are in the
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., observed that, Rape is not merely a physical assault; it is often destructive of the whole
by Abhishek Gurawa†
Delhi High Court: Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. granted bail to a young mother of two minor children, who was booked in connection with
Delhi High Court: Suresh Kumar Kait, J., reiterated that no party could be permitted to unilaterally appoint an Arbitrator, as the same
Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., addressed a suit for trade mark infringement, wherein the Court additionally addressed the scope of Section
Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Manmohan and Navin Chawla, JJ., noted the mandatory condition provided under Section 144B (7) of
Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., decided a matter concerning dishonour of cheque. Petitioner had filed a suit for recovery of Rs
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J., while addressing the present matter held that prima facie view on territorial jurisdiction has to be
Delhi High Court: Yogesh Khanna, J., remarked that, Once the Parliament steps in and cures the defect pointed out by a Constitutional
Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., held that, “…relegating parties to customary Courts when they themselves admit that they are following
Delhi High Court: V. Kameswar Rao, J., had set aside the controversial order of the CCIM (Central Council of Indian Medicine), whereby,
Delhi High Court: Jayant Nath, J., held that, Exception 3 to Section 28 of the Contract Act deals with curtailment of the
Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., while quoting that ‘Promises are meant to be broken’ stated that the law has evolved
Delhi High Court Vide the Public Notice dated 22-07-2021, Full Court observed that physical hearings in the Delhi High Court may be
Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon, JJ., held that the pawnor, merely by his act
Delhi High Court: Mukta Gupta, J., decides a matter revolving around the Will of a deceased person. Factual Background Instant suit was
District Court: The Court of Devanshu Sajlan, MM, NI Act-05/(West)/Delhi, allowed a mutual application moved on behalf of the parties for the
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., granted an interim injunction in favour of Tata Sons (P) Ltd. in a case where the
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J., refused to interfere in the interim arbitral award whereby the sole arbitrator had allowed certain claims of