
Delhi High Court awards cost of Rs. 9 lakhs to a US based company to protect its well-known mark ‘JOHN DEERE’ and ‘TORQ-GARD’
Delhi High Court: In a case filed by a US based company for protection of its mark ‘JOHN DEERE’ and
Delhi High Court: In a case filed by a US based company for protection of its mark ‘JOHN DEERE’ and
Delhi High Court: In a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the mark ‘Shopibay’ which was similar
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, CJ and S. Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia*, JJ has set aside the order
Supreme Court: In a case wherein the appeal challenged the final judgment and order passed by the High Court of
Any irregularity or illegality in the remand order is not a statutorily sanctioned reason for grant of default bail
Rouse Avenue District Courts, Delhi: In a case filed by Central Bureau of Investigation questioning the power of investigating agency
In Union of India v. W.N. Chadha,1993 Supp (4) SCC 260, the bench of S. Ratnavel Pandian and K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ explained the exclusion of the application of the principle of audi alteram partem in relation to an accused at the stage of investigation.
Gauhati High Court: While deciding the instant appeal preferred by Ranjan Daimari and 9 others regarding their conviction and sentence
Delhi High Court: In an application filed by Aakash Choudhary (‘petitioner’) seeking anticipatory bail, as FIR was registered against him
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Indiamart Intermesh Limited (‘plaintiff’) seeking permanent injunction against fraudulent website https://india-mart.co/ registered
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant applications seeking to set aside the orders passed by the Special
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Sanjay Dhar, J. dismissed a petition which was filed challenging FIR registered under Sections 153,
Delhi High Court: In an application filed by the applicant who is a UP Police official, charged under Section 302,
Parallel inquiries by two different authorities in their respective spheres of adjudication are not uncommon and a slight overlap between the inquiries does not mean that one must lead to the ouster of the other.
Supreme Court: After the Technical Committee and the Overseeing Judge submitted their reports in the Pegasus Spyware case, the 3-judge bench of
Calcutta High Court: Shampa Sarkar, J. stayed the investigation in a matter which came up over an artist’s Facebook post containing intimate
Madras High Court– G Chandrasekharan, J. ordered further investigation into the case where a man died under suspicious circumstances and alleged negligence
Madras High Court: V Sivagnanam J. directed the State police to add the offences under Sections 417 and 420 Penal
Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi: While granting bail to the applicant Pramond Kumar Bhasin, Ajay Gulati, J. observed that the charge sheet
Gauhati High Court: The single Bench of Ajit Borthakur, J., has under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, granted bail