Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The systematic, organised and intentional nature of the infringement, and the regularity and consistency with which the said content is being updated/ uploaded on the said “rogue websites” shows the extent of the violation of the rights of the plaintiff in real time.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The plaintiff stated that on 22-01-2025, the defendant announced on various social media platforms that the Assigned Film will be released on 27-03-2025. He stated that the theatrical release of the Assigned Film is proposed in the Southern States of India i.e., Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Pondicherry in original language – Tamil as well as overseas (except Nepal).

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court stated that the mala fide intent of Defendants 7 and 8, is evident from their infringing activity of selling counterfeit products bearing the plaintiff’s trade mark with the sole objective of capitalizing on the immense goodwill and brand image enjoyed by the plaintiff.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The CCTV footage exhibited before the Court does not clearly reveal the shooter’s identity. Moreover, the forensic analysis of the CCTV footage and the Call Detail Records analysis of the accused’s mobile phone is still pending. Therefore, the Court refrains from drawing any conclusions at this stage.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Accessibility Audit Report revealed an alarming state of affairs inasmuch as 207 accessibility issues is identified in the ‘Rapido Android App’. Notably, 81 of these issues are referred to as “High Impact (P0)”.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, the Court will not ordinarily embark upon an inquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it the accusations will not be sustained, as that is the function of the Trial Court.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Petitioner averred that on account of COVID-19 pandemic, he was unable to operate his SMU and therefore, in light of a policy decision taken by the respondents to give extension, treating the pandemic period as dies non, benefit of extension was granted to the petitioner up to 16-03-2025.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The long duration and wide geographical area for which the TAJ marks have been in use, their goodwill and reputation due to the extensive promotion and extensive revenue generated by the plaintiff, in India and other countries, the TAJ marks have achieved the status of well-known trade marks.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot exercise the administrative power of transfer of case from one Court to another within its jurisdiction, unless an order is passed by the High Court under Section 10(2) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“It is a matter of record that the female athletes have brought significant sporting glory to the country and this Court cannot countenance a situation where equilibrium is not maintained between the male and female contingents in sporting events.”

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court observed that the involvement of the complainant remains a matter of judicial discretion rather than an enforceable entitlement, and the fundamental principle of juvenile justice i.e., ‘rehabilitation over retribution’ must remain paramount in any such determination.