Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Jubin Nautiyal is a well-known, popular and well-accepted personality and if the ex-parte ad-interim injunction and other directions, as sought, are not passed, irreparable loss and injury which may not be compensated in monetary terms.”
“The copyright of the plaintiff over his own personality, which include, amongst others, his image, likeness, voice, name, signature, which are distinctive and exclusively associated with him, cannot, prima facie, be doubted at this stage.”
Defendant 1 had created and circulated AI-morphed content of the plaintiff including a movie titled ‘AI Love Story’
“Since the trademarks of the plaintiff are registered, the balance of convenience is tilted in favour of the plaintiff and in case, ex-parte ad-interim injunction is not granted, the reputation and goodwill of the petitioner may be injured.”
‘The classification between the Indian and foreign employee is based on the economic duress which is caused to the Indian employees, if they are mandated to contribute to the fund/scheme irrespective of quantum of salary they draw, which is absent in case of the foreign employees for the reason that they come to India for employment for shorter period of 2 to 5 years.”
“The Parliament, though has enacted the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 and has also framed Rules thereunder, however, it appears that the welfare measures, which may be made pursuant to the statutory obligations cast on the Governments under the said Act, have also not been made.”
“The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 was made by the legislature of the day expressing the solemn desire and wish of the people of the Country to preserve their heritage and historical ethos. The Tughlakabad Fort is one such ancient monument which is of national importance, and reflects our historical ethos and heritage and therefore, needs to be preserved.”
In this case, the appellant had challenged the judgment of the High Court’s Single Judge Bench, wherein it was held that advocates representing the opposing party had no fiduciary or professional relationship vis-a-vis the appellant.
The Ph.D. degree which was awarded to Respondent 5 did not presuppose acquisition of lower qualification, i.e. master’s degree in Ayurveda. Respondent 5 was admitted to Ph.D. course without undergoing the master’s degree course immediately after obtaining his graduation degree in Ayurveda.
The jurisdiction available to this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution is primarily in the nature of superintendence and accordingly the Letters Patent Appeal will not lie in the instant matter.
In the present case, highly qualified and experienced medical doctors were to render an opinion as to whether the appellant is eligible to complete the MBBS Course, even if the appellant was to only become a teacher. That opinion had been rendered in detail.
‘If Delhi wants to be a world class city — we all must behave like world class citizens and the civic agencies must become more proactive in setting world class ethics.’
‘As per the ‘clean slate’ principle — to get a fresh breath, the successful Resolution Applicant is permitted to proceed in resurrecting the ‘on-going concern’ and no surprise claims are flung upon it, lest the effort of revitalizing and restarting the Corporate Debtor are wasted.’
‘Civic agencies should carry out a year-long public awareness campaign to inform people how their feeding does not benefit the monkeys but only harms them by increasing their dependence on humans.’
‘Such a legal vacuum disabling the villagers from managing their immovable properties prima facie violates their fundamental right under Article 21 and constitutional rights under Article 300A of the Constitution.’
Donations, gifts etc., which were being received by the appellant, and being vested in the committee, from various institutions will be endowments for public purpose.
The petition was requested to be treated as a representation since the Government is in the process of receiving inputs on the new criminal laws from various stakeholders.
‘In the present case, the victim and his family had suffered at the hands of an insensitive and callous administration and had to approach the Constitutional Courts four times for the redressal of his grievances.’
The formation of opinion under Section 20(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is in the exercise of supervisory powers of Central Information Commission and not in the exercise of the adjudicatory powers.
“There is not even a single scrap of a document placed on record by the appellant/society to show any kind of legitimacy it exercises, either over the land or the illegal structure built thereon.”