Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The term VAPO is merely an abbreviation of the word vapour and it is descriptive and common to the trade and nobody can claim exclusive right to use any abbreviation, which has become publici juris.”
“Only when the subject matter of the dispute relates to actions in rem, that do not relate to subordinate rights in personam arising from rights in rem, the subject matter will be non-arbitrable.”
As there is no provision in the RERA Act giving authority to the RERA Tribunal to deal with the subject matter of the suit, the jurisdiction of this Court cannot be said to be barred in the situation where the plaintiff requested for canceling the allotment.
The Delhi High Court observed that “Dichotomizing the claims and the accompanying specifications is, therefore, contrary to the most fundamental canons of patent law.”
Delhi High Court: In a suit for permanent injunction and damages for infringement of marks, passing off and unfair competition
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant appeal wherein substantial questions of law were raised vis-a-vis SectionS 80,
Calcutta High Court: Moushumi Bhattacharya, J. decided on a petition which was filed being aggrieved by a notice cancelling a provisional eligibility
Patna High Court: The Division Bench of Sanjay Karol, CJ., and S. Kumar, J., denied to entertain an intra-court appeal against the
Supreme Court: After the Court was approached seeking direction to the Government to provide notified ex-gratia monitory compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- to the
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): Dinesh Singh (Presiding Member), expressed that whether, for a particular purpose, a company is a ‘consumer’,
Patna High Court: A Division bench of Sanjay Karol, CJ and S. Kumar, J., addressed two crucial issues revolving around the COVID-19 Pandemic.
As reported by ANI, Delhi High Court’s Single-Judge Bench transfers petition challenging detention, seeking relief & release of Jamia students, locals detained
Rajasthan High Court: Sandeep Mehta, J. suspended the punishment awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge in the Sessions Case No. 46 of
Karnataka High Court: H.B. Prabhakara Sastry, J. dismissed the petition under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence punishable
Patna High Court: Mohit Kumar Shah, J. refused to grant relief to petitioner on humanitarian grounds contrary to the law. Petitioner, a
Uttaranchal High Court: A writ petition was entertained by a Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. and subsequently
Jharkhand High Court: The Bench of Aniruddha Bose, C.J. and B.B. Mangalmurti, J. dismissed a petition claiming arrears of pension, post retrial
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Surya Kant, C.J. and Sandeep Sharma, J. dismissed a letters patent appeal finding no
Punjab and Haryana High Court: This petition was filed before the Bench of Rajiv Narain Raina, J., where allegation of submission of
Jharkhand High Court: The Bench of Dr S.N. Pathak, J., allowed a petition assailing the order and judgment passed by learned Railway