delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Where the plaint is returned under Order VII Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, on its presentation before the appropriate Court of jurisdiction, the suit will be treated as a fresh suit, and will have to start de novo, and all proceedings before the earlier Court will be rendered a nullity.”

delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The grievance of Patanjali Ayurved is that a video has been uploaded by respondent on the internet platforms owned by Meta Inc. having an advertisement of mens undergarments, wherein Patanjali’s trademark along with pictures of its brand ambassadors and directors are shown used unauthorizedly.

allahabad high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Section 34 confers power on the court to set aside an award, the power could be exercised to set aside any or all such awards, whether composite, interim, final or additional”

Kerala High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Referring to the amended portion of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Supreme Court’s interpretation, Kerala High Court found the Commercial Court’s refusal for acceptance after delay in filing written statement beyond 120 days justified.

Allahabad High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Fraud, as an exception to the rule of non-interference with encashment of bank guarantees, is not any fraud, but a fraud of an egregious nature, going to the root i.e., to the foundation of the bank guarantee and an established fraud. The entire case of the respondent fails to qualify for this.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Uttaranchal High Court: The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and Krishna Murari, JJ has explained the scope of powers of a Commercial Court while

Rajasthan High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Rajasthan High Court: Ashok Kumar Gaur, J. found that the writ petition by the petitioner lacks merit and dismissed it

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Amit Bansal, J., expressed that Just because the photograph of the summons were sent by the plaintiff to the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Amit Bansal, J., decided under whether the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India can interfere

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: A Division Bench comprising of Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. held that once an Arbitral Tribunal is constituted, the