Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court clarified that at the present stage it was not conducting a final hearing, because if the petitioner was not provisionally permitted to appear in JEE Advanced 2026 to be conducted on 17 May 2026, the petition would become infructuous.
“It cannot be lost sight of the fact that the kind of consumer who would purchase these infringing goods would not enter into a detailed enquiry as to whether these infringing products are genuinely those of the plaintiff or not. The plaintiff is most likely to suffer on financial account too.”
The dispute concerned the broadcast and commercial exploitation of the ween the parties relating to the broadcast and commercial exploitation of the Legends League Cricket tournament, managed by Absolute Legends Sports.
“The procurement of license by the respondent in the past would indicate the knowledge of the respondents that, for the purpose of communicating the plaintiff’s copyrighted sound recordings, it is necessary to obtain the license from the plaintiff.”
The Court accepted the contention that encashment of insurance surety bonds aggregating to nearly ₹100 crores, prior to final adjudication, would result in grave and irreversible loss and injury.
“The defendants are operating about 94 establishments, and continuing infringement would result in loss and damage to the plaintiff tilting the balance of convenience in favour of the plaintiff.”
“The plaintiffs are the prior adopters and long-standing users of the subject mark ‘HIMALAYA’ since 1930 in connection with ayurvedic, wellness, pharmaceutical and personal care products.”
Defendant 1 was circulating AI-generated images/ deepfakes falsely depicting Suniel Shetty and his family members in obscene and salacious manner on various social media platforms.
The Defendant was discharged from service during the probation period itself and upon discharge he published statements and videos disparaging ICICI Bank.
The remedy under Section 9 is equitable, discretionary in nature and primarily exercised to preserve subject matter of arbitration or to prevent frustration of arbitral proceedings. Such power must be exercised cautiously, particularly where interim relief sought effectively amounts to grant of final relief or impinges upon statutory powers conferred under Companies Act, 2013.
In this case, Shreyas Talpade was linked to an alleged financial scam involving a Haryana-based cooperative society, which was accused of defrauding investors.
The outcome of the case will be important and have far reaching effects greatly impacting revenue collection of Municipal Bodies from Telecom Infrastructure Companies. Legally important questions of law including the power to tax Telecommunications Equipment (which falls under Entry 31 the Union List) shall be examined.
“We also find that in the year 2025 itself, about 14 suicides have taken place. This is a matter of serious concern for us.”
“The video recorded by Defendant 1 is extremely offensive, sexually explicit, foul and filthy utterances were made in the said video by Defendant 1 against the plaintiffs, which per se shocks the conscience of the court.”
The data can be misused for a variety of purposes including for the purpose of impersonating applicant- HDFC Life Insurance Co. Ltd., which will involve infringement of applicant’s registered trade mark and passing off.
In the Judgment dated 12-09-2024, Supreme Court had held that an application for extension of time for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A (4) read with Section 29A (5) is maintainable even after the expiry of the twelve-month or the extended six-month period. The court, while adjudicating such extension applications will be guided by the principle of sufficient cause.
“When a party is relegated to the High Court to pursue its remedies, it would not be proper, in the normal course, to bind the said High Court with directions in relation to the proceedings to be impugned before such Court.”
“When the Arbitral Tribunal is in seisin of disputes between parties, there is the pernicious possibility of any observation being made by the Court influencing the proceedings before the Arbitral Tribunal”
The Court stated that mere addition of prefix and/or suffix to the impugned mark is inconsequential, thus, it rejected Dubond Products India’s contention that the use of the word “HYDROBUILD” before “LW” in the impugned marks is sufficient to distinguish from the marks of Pidilite Industries.