Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court stated that it is not open to L&T Ltd. to interpret the tender conditions in a manner which is contrary to MMRDA’s interpretation.
Around December 2021, when the applicant decided to go public by floating an IPO that the defendant commenced use of the name METBRANDS and until that time, the defendant was operating and offering goods and services under the name ‘METRENDS’.
Despite being served, Respondent 1 chose not to appear and justify the basis on which the statements and insinuations are made against the applicant.
Clause 2.8.1(f) of the General Conditions of Contract, which enables MMRDA to terminate the contract without assigning any reasons, cannot be read to mean that MMRDA has a licence to act unfairly, or arbitrarily.
Social media platforms, print media, other digital/non-digital mediums and other relevant intermediaries are also restrained from publishing, sharing, hosting, circulating, or promoting any further defamatory content about plaintiff.
The writ court must be careful to ensure that outside narrow scope, no intervention is made that interferes with the progress of the election.
Several defamatory statements were made against Malabar Gold Ltd. by Respondent 1 on his YouTube channel titled “Marunadan Malayali”.
Due to the respondent 1’s brazen disregard for the status quo order, the Court in absence of a Section 17 remedy, had to grant an interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
“When the genuineness of a Will is called into question, the conscience of the Court has to be satisfied that the Will is not only executed and attested in the manner required, but also that the same was the product of free volition of the executant.”