{"id":339737,"date":"2025-01-25T12:00:21","date_gmt":"2025-01-25T06:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=339737"},"modified":"2025-01-25T14:27:01","modified_gmt":"2025-01-25T08:57:01","slug":"high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/","title":{"rendered":"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

ARBITRATION<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Duty of Referral Court in post-award stage to prevent misuse of arbitration’; Plea by Jaiprakash Associates rejected for second arbitration in Rs. 360 Crores claim<\/p>\n

In an arbitration petition filed under Section 11<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘the Act’) by Jaiprakash Associates Limited (‘JP Associates’) seeking recommencement of the arbitration and appointment of nominee Arbitrator on behalf of the NHPC Limited (‘NHPC’) for adjudication of their disputes, the Single Judge Bench of Subramonium Prasad, J., dismissed the petition holding that the present case was demonstrably ‘non-arbitrable’ as there was no live dispute between the parties and re-adjudication of JP Associates’ claim would be a waste of resources and an improper use of the arbitration process. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BAIL<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Considerations for bail cannot be same in cases involving anti-national activities, terrorism and involvement with dreaded gangsters; Bail petition of UAPA accused dismissed<\/p>\n

In the present case, an appeal filed by the appellant (‘accused’) under Section 21<\/a> of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008<\/a> (‘NIA Act’) assailing the impugned judgment dated 10-05-2023. As per the impugned judgment, the accused’s application for seeking grant of regular bail for offences registered under Section 120<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and Section 17<\/a>\/18<\/a>\/18-B<\/a> of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967<\/a> (‘UAPA’), was dismissed. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Co-operation with investigation doesn’t extend to self-incrimination’; Anticipatory bail granted to accused in Municipal Corporation corruption case<\/p>\n

In an anticipatory bail application filed in an FIR registered under Sections 7<\/a> and 7-A<\/a> of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<\/a> and Section 120-B<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a>, a Single Judge Bench of Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., allowed the application stating that failure to provide information about the co-accused and aid in recovery of bribe money was not a ground for denial of bail plea and did not amount to non-cooperation with the investigation. The Court also stated that co-operation with the investigation did not extend to compelling self-incrimination, extracting confessions, or using coercion. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Bail proceedings relate only to the release of a person from ‘judicial custody’ and cannot be employed to seek release from ‘executive detention’<\/p>\n

A bail application was filed seeking grant of regular bail in FIR dated 22-07-2022 registered under Sections 366-B<\/a>, 370<\/a>, 419<\/a>, 420<\/a>, 465<\/a>, 466<\/a>, 467<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 471<\/a>, 474<\/a>, 109<\/a>, 120-B<\/a>, 34<\/a> and 174-A<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) and under Section 14<\/a> of the Foreigners Act, 1946<\/a> Sections 3<\/a>, 4<\/a> and 5<\/a> of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956<\/a> (‘ITP Act’) but as the proceedings acquired added complexity as regards the jurisdiction of the court seeking to direct the State authorities to also grant an appropriate visa to the petitioner. Jairam Bhambhani, J., granted bail to the applicant and held that the scope of a bail petition is only to consider whether or not, in a given case, an under-trial or a convict seeking suspension of sentence is to be released from the custody of the court, namely ‘judicial custody’ to the custody of a surety and not to verify, or endorse, or direct grant any visa status to a foreign national, who has sought the relief of enlargement on bail. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Protracted absence, eluding law, & repetitive bail pleas don’t call for sympathy’; Anticipatory bail refused to accused in 5kg opium case<\/p>\n

In a second anticipatory bail application filed by the accused under Section 482<\/a> of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’) for alleged offence under Sections 18(c)<\/a> and 29<\/a> of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985<\/a> (‘NDPS Act’), the Single Judge Bench of Sumeet Goel, J., rejected the application holding that the accused evaded arrest for two and a half years and demonstrated a clear disregard for the judicial process. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Consent to engage in physical relations does not extend to misuse of a person’s private moments in an inappropriate manner<\/p>\n

A bail application was filed under Section 439<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code<\/a> (CrPC)\/Section 483<\/a> of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNSS’) seeking grant of regular bail in FIR for offence punishable under Section 376<\/a> and 506<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Neb Sarai, Delhi. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., dismissed the bail application as the attempt to weaponize the complainant’s marital status and professional background to diminish the gravity of the allegations is unacceptable. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CRUELTY<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | Considering hospitalisation as pre-requisite to invoke S. 498-A IPC erodes purpose of provision; such narrow interpretation will render provision ineffective<\/p>\n

In an application filed by the applicant (‘husband’) under Section 482<\/a> of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> seeking anticipatory bail for offence punishable under Sections 498-A<\/a>\/406<\/a>\/34<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) and Sections 3<\/a>\/4<\/a> of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961<\/a>, Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., stated that allowing such an argument to prevail that hospitalization was a prerequisite for invoking Section 498-A IPC, would erode the very purpose of the provision. Section 498-A of IPC was enacted to address the plight of women who suffer various forms of cruelty, not just physical abuse that resulted in visible injuries. If this ideology was allowed to grow, it would close the doors of justice for countless women who endure abuse behind closed doors, leaving them trapped in a distressing and oppressive environment. Such a narrow interpretation would render Section 498-A of IPC ineffective, silencing many victims and perpetuating cycles of abuse. Thus, the Court dismissed the present bail application. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DOWRY DEATH<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Details of manual strangulation reflects how victim suffered traumatic end of her life’; Bail application of husband in dowry death case, dismissed<\/p>\n

In an application filed under Section 483<\/a> of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a> read with Section 439<\/a> of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> on behalf of the applicant-husband, seeking grant of regular bail for offences punishable under Sections 302<\/a>\/304-B<\/a>\/498-A<\/a>\/34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., every case tells a different story, and therefore, every case had a different outcome and adjudicatory order. While granting or rejecting bail, the Court remained conscious of the fact that a liberal and lenient approach at the time of grant of bail in a heinous crime, where a wife was brutally murdered, allegedly and apparently, under the influence of liquor at the spur of the moment, could be counter-productive and defeated the very purpose and intent of Section 304-B of IPC. Thus, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the gravity of the offence, the Court stated that no ground for grant of bail was made out at this stage and accordingly, dismissed the bail application. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

EDUCATION LAW<\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Limit of 15% marks in viva voce can be exceeded in judiciary exams’; Relief denied to judiciary aspirant who failed by 6.75 marks<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking relief regarding his non-appointment as a Civil Judge due to his failing the exam by 6.75 marks, the Division Bench of Sheel Nagu*, CJ., and Sudhir Singh, J., dismissed the petition while holding that the petitioner entered the process of recruitment with open eyes and was well aware of the passing marks, thus, the principle of estoppel would operate against him. The Court also held that it was valid to exceed the 15% limit for viva voce as the broader purpose of evaluating a candidate’s suitability for a judicial position required a more nuanced approach. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

ORISSA HIGH COURT<\/span> | NEET-UG candidate’s plea who lost Govt. college MBBS seat due to technical glitch in MCC’s Mop-up Counselling Round, rejected<\/p>\n

In a writ petition under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, seeking a direction for the grant of a Government College MBBS seat, which would have certainly been granted had he not been prevented from participating in AIQ Mop-up Round and AIQ Stray Vacancy Round due to alleged technical glitch, the Division Bench of Chakradhari Sharan Singh, CJ and Savitri Ratho, J. dismissed the petition saying that the question of the technical glitch was a disputed question of fact, hence, it was not inclined to enter into such a disputed question of fact in a proceeding under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> for considering the petitioner’s claim for an award of compensation. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS<\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | BHARAT GATE mark is deceptively similar to INDIA GATE; Injunction restored<\/p>\n

An appeal was filed challenging the order of the District Judge (Commercial Court), which vacated the ad interim injunction previously granted in the appellant’s favor seeking to reinstate the injunction on the grounds that the impugned order is patently illegal and unsustainable in law. A division bench of C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul, JJ., quashed the impugned order and restored the ad interim order dated 09-10-2020, passed by the Commercial Court. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

DELHI HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Identical marks, identical goods\/services and identical target consumers’; Relief granted in favour of Rapido in trade mark dispute<\/p>\n

In a rectification petitions filed under Sections 47<\/a> and 57<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (‘the Act’) seeking rectification\/cancellation of registrations of the impugned mark ‘RAPIDO’, Amit Bansal, J., stated that as evident from the aforesaid, the impugned mark was identical with the petitioner’s RAPIDO marks in relation to identical \/ similar goods and services. Further, the target consumers of the competing parties were also identical. Thus, the Triple Identity Test, i.e., the existence of an identity \/ similarity between the respective marks, goods\/ services and trade channels was satisfied in the present petitions. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Plea to stay release of film “Sky Force” in copyright infringement case against script titled “Fire Bird”, rejected<\/p>\n

In the present case, applicant sought urgent ad-interim relief for restraining defendants from releasing\/broadcasting\/exploiting film titled “Sky Force”, which was to be released on 24-01-2025. A Single Judge Bench of Manish Pitale, J., stated that applicant could not claim ignorance of various materials that were available in the public domain pertaining to the film “Sky Force”, at least since October 2023. The Court rejected the prayer for ad-interim relief and held that defendants would suffer immense loss, if ad-interim stay of release of the film was granted, particularly when applicant had approached this Court at the eleventh hour and just before release of the film. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

NDPS<\/p>\n

KERALA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Magic mushroom not a scheduled narcotic or psychotropic substance; Bail granted to NDPS accused<\/p>\n

In a bail application filed by the petitioner (‘accused’) under Section 483<\/a> of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a>, for case was registered against him for the offences punishable under Section 22(c)<\/a> and 8(c)<\/a> read with Section 20(b)(ii)(A)<\/a> of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985<\/a> (‘NDPS Act’), P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J.*, stated that the mushroom or magic mushroom was not a scheduled narcotic or psychotropic substance. The Court stated there were no materials to find that the accused was in possession of commercial quantity of psilocybin. If commercial quantity was not applicable, the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act was also not applicable. Since, there were no criminal antecedents alleged against the accused, and the accused was in custody for about 90 days, therefore, in such circumstances, the Court granted bail to the accused after imposing stringent conditions. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION<\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | “PIL filed to settle personal score, no illegality in construction of shopping complex”; ₹25,000 cost imposed<\/p>\n

In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) file by ex-Sarpanch challenging the demolition of an old Government Girls School building and subsequent construction of shopping complex on same land at Gram Panchayat, Chandwasa, Jila Panchayat, Mandsaur, a Division Bench of Gajendra Singh and Vivek Rusia,* JJ., dismissed the PIL, finding no illegality in the actions of the Gram Panchayat and imposed a of ₹25,000\/- on the petitioner. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUBLIC PROPERTY<\/p>\n

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT<\/span> | “Gaps in structure attributed to seasonal changes”; Plea alleging cracks in newly constructed Flyover, dismissed<\/p>\n

In a writ petition challenging the structural integrity of newly constructed flyover based on alleged defects in its construction, a division bench of Suresh Kumar Kait, CJ., and Vivek Jain, J., noted that the gaps observed were a natural result of seasonal expansion and contraction and disposed of the writ petition due to lack of supporting scientific evidence. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

QUASHING OF PROCEEDINGS\/FIR<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Mere statement that wife cannot cohabit with husband unless she brings amount without any action will not amount to harassment’; FIR quashed<\/p>\n

In a criminal application filed under Section 482<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) seeking quashing of FIR registered under Sections 498-A<\/a>, 323<\/a>, 504<\/a>, 506<\/a> read with Section 34<\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) as well as the proceedings therein, the Division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi* and Rohit W. Joshi, JJ., allowed the application while holding that the allegations were vague and the witness statements were copy pasted. The Court also rebuked the investigating authorities for the manner in which investigations are carried out in such cases. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

SCAMS<\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Plea for de-freezing of Vuenow Infotech’s bank accounts in Cloud Particle Scam case, refused<\/p>\n

In a set of two criminal writ petitions filed by Vuenow Infotech Pvt. Ltd. (‘VIPL’) seeking inter alia directions to the Enforcement Department (‘ED’) to produce all the records regarding the inquiry being conducted against VIPL Section 37<\/a> of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999<\/a> (‘FEMA’) read with Section 132<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961<\/a> (‘IT Act’) as well as quashing of the ECIR, search and seizure proceedings, and freezing of VIPL’s bank accounts, the Division Bench of Sheel Nagu, CJ., and Anil Kshetarpal*, J., disposed of the petitions holding that it was not appropriate for the Court to interfere at this stage and granted liberty to VIPL to present their case before the Adjudicating Authority under FEMA and PMLA. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

SERVICE LAW<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Not in excess of permissible 25% quota’; Plea challenging Nomination in recruitment process of District Judges, dismissed<\/p>\n

In the present case, petitioner-Maharashtra State Judges Association, an Association comprising members of judicial service in the State of Maharashtra, sought to raise a challenge to the recruitment process of District Judges through Nomination and challenged the advertisement dated 30-09-2023 regarding the selection process for the year 2022 and the advertisement dated 09-01-2024 regarding selection process for the year 2023. The Division Bench of A.S. Chandurkar* and Rajesh S. Patil, JJ., dismissed the petition and held that the attempt to fill in the 25% posts through Nomination was not in excess of 25% quota, that is, what was permissible under the Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008 (‘the 2008 Rules’). Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT<\/span> | Order releasing Retired Municipal Officer’s gratuity withheld sans inquiry on allegation of misappropriating ₹ 10 Lakhs, upheld<\/p>\n

In an intra-court appeal filed by the State against the impugned order wherein the Single Judge allowed the writ petition of the respondent granting him the entire amount of his gratuity, which had been withheld by the State due to allegations of misappropriation of funds, the Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha*, CJ., and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J., dismissed the appeal holding that the Single Judge did not commit any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error warranting interference as not only was such recovery impermissible in law but also there was no pre-retirement inquiry regarding the alleged misappropriation of funds by the respondent. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT<\/span> | Reinstatement of a Judge dispensed with service after complaint by his former wife, ordered<\/p>\n

In a civil writ petition filed by a Judge seeking to quash his dismissal from Haryana Civil Services (‘HCS’) (Judicial Branch) and withdrawal of judicial work from him, the Division Bench of Sheel Nagu*, CJ., and Anil Kshetarpal*, J., allowed the petition holding that the petitioner was deprived of the fair opportunity to defend himself and directed his reinstatement with continuity of service, back wages, and seniority. Read more HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | ‘Granting appointment out of turn would violate fairness & equality’; Plea for compassionate appointment to waitlisted candidate, dismissed<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed seeking directions for compassionate appointment of the petitioner in the Public Works Department, Goa (‘PWD’), the Division Bench of M. S. Karnik and Nivedita P. Mehta*, JJ., dismissed the petition holding that the State was in the process of considering the petitioner’s claim within the framework of the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment, Goa (‘the Scheme’) and granting him an appointment out of turn would prejudice other candidates on the waitlist and violate the principles of fairness and equality. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

SPORTS, SPORTSPERSONS, SPORTS BODIES AND AUTHORITIES<\/p>\n

BOMBAY HIGH COURT<\/span> | Plea for postponement of 38th National Games due to denied entry to Maharashtra Women Diving Team for alleged biased & unfair selection trials, dismissed<\/p>\n

In a writ petition filed seeking postponement of the 38th National Games since the Maharashtra State Aquatic Coordination Committee (‘MSACC’) was unable to send names for the Maharashtra Diving Team (Women), the Division Bench of Bharati Dangre and Ashwin D. Bhobe, JJ., dismissed the petition holding that it was not possible to postpone the entire event since it would affect other participants but suggested MSACC to seek an extension for sending names of swimmers from the Swimming Federation of India (‘SFI’) or the Games Technical Conduct Committee (‘GTCC’). However, it was the discretion of the GTCC to decide on the issue. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

TRANSFER OF CASE\/TRIAL<\/p>\n

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT<\/span> | “Necessity for gender-neutral society”; Plea to transfer divorce petition on account of husband’s greater inconvenience, dismissed<\/p>\n

While considering the instant matter seeking withdrawal and transfer of petition for dissolution of marriage pending before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Narasimharajapura; the Bench of Chillakur Sumalatha, J.*, took note of the inconvenience that would be caused to the husband as he has been taking care of the children who are under his custody. The Court dismissed the petition opining that the inconvenience projected by the petitioner (wife) to attend the Court at Narasimharajapura, Chikkamagaluru District will not be greater than the inconvenience that will be faced by the husband if the case is transferred. Read more HERE<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":339752,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[46069,45673],"tags":[77810,77799,34035,77877,68448,77785,6691,48567,77879,77876,77878,58081,27054,77729,77712,7841,33055,8421,6721,46030,5941,77854,42599,13351],"class_list":["post-339737","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-high-court-round-up","category-columns-for-roundup","tag-38th-national-games","tag-akshay-kumar","tag-anti-national-activities","tag-bharat-gate","tag-bnss","tag-cloud-particle-scam","tag-dowry-death","tag-education-law","tag-executive-detention","tag-gangsters","tag-gender-neutral-society","tag-jp-associates","tag-judicial-custody","tag-magic-mushrooms","tag-manual-strangulation","tag-ndps","tag-neet-ug","tag-public-property","tag-quashment-of-proceedings","tag-self-incrimination","tag-service-law","tag-sky-force","tag-trade-marks","tag-transfer-of-case"],"yoast_head":"\nHigh Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025: Read stories on Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; etc\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025: Read stories on Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; etc\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-01-25T06:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-01-25T08:57:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-28.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/\",\"name\":\"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-01-25T06:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-01-25T08:57:01+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025: Read stories on Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; etc\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"High Court Weekly Roundup\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025| SCC Times","description":"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025: Read stories on Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; etc","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more","og_description":"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025: Read stories on Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; etc","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-01-25T06:30:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-01-25T08:57:01+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-28.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/","name":"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp","datePublished":"2025-01-25T06:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2025-01-25T08:57:01+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"High Court Weekly Roundup for January 2025: Read stories on Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; etc","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"High Court Weekly Roundup"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/25\/high-court-weekly-roundup-january-2025-on-rapido-trade-mark-magic-mushrooms\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Rapido\u2019s Trade Mark; Magic Mushrooms; Cloud Particle Scam; Sky Force Movie; and more"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Media-_28_.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":339356,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/18\/delhi-hc-rejects-plea-jp-associates-second-arbitration-round-non-arbitrable-360-crores-claim\/","url_meta":{"origin":339737,"position":0},"title":"\u2018Duty of Referral Court in post-award stage to prevent misuse of arbitration\u2019; Delhi HC rejects plea by Jaiprakash Associates for second arbitration in Rs. 360 Crores claim","author":"Editor","date":"January 18, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cApplying the \u2018eye of the needle\u2019 test, the Court has no hesitation in observing that the prima facie scrutiny of the facts of the present case, leads to a clear conclusion that there is not even a vestige of doubt that the claim is non-arbitrable.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293556,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/01\/delhi-high-court-sets-aside-additional-costs-60crores-for-award-being-patently-illegal-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":339737,"position":1},"title":"Delhi High Court sets aside additional costs of Rs. 60 crores granted in favour of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd in absence of substantial evidence","author":"Arunima","date":"June 1, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"An arbitral tribunal is also considered a court for the purposes of adjudication of claims before it and is often subject to the requirement of providing reasons while granting a party any relief, not for the purposes of adjudicating the validity of an order but for the satisfaction, understanding and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":61541,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/14\/national-conference-on-international-and-domestic-arbitration\/","url_meta":{"origin":339737,"position":2},"title":"National Conference on International and Domestic Arbitration","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 14, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Reported by Saranya Mishra","rel":"","context":"In "Conference\/Seminars\/Lectures"","block_context":{"text":"Conference\/Seminars\/Lectures","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/lawschoolnews\/conference_seminars_lectures\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"ILS","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/ILS-Pune-Long.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/ILS-Pune-Long.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/ILS-Pune-Long.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/ILS-Pune-Long.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/ILS-Pune-Long.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":279573,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/14\/iamc-organising-conference-on-the-topic-changing-facets-of-arbitration-lawdecember-18-2022\/","url_meta":{"origin":339737,"position":3},"title":"IAMC organising conference on the topic \u201cChanging Facets of Arbitration Law\u201d[December 18, 2022]","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 14, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"The International Arbitration & Mediation Centre, Hyderabad in association with Disputandum and Goel & Associates is organizing a conference on the topic \u201cChanging Facets of Arbitration Law\u201d. The Chief Guest of the event is Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta, Judge, Supreme Court of India (Retd.). The Hon'ble speakers are Mr.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Events\/Webinars"","block_context":{"text":"Events\/Webinars","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/events-and-webinars\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Changing Facets of Arbitration Law","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-465.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":218040,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/13\/competition-commission-of-india-finds-conduct-and-practice-of-jaiprakash-associates-ltd-to-be-in-contravention-of-competition-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":339737,"position":4},"title":"CCI finds conduct and practice of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. to be in contravention of Competition Law","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 13, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has found Jaiprakash Associates Limited (JAL) to be in contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 (Act) for abuse of dominant position in the market of independent residential units such as villas, estate homes in their integrated township, by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315434,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-nhpc-entitlement-decree-enforceable-in-law-grants-execution-of-arbitral-award-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":339737,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court holds NHPC entitlement as decree enforceable in law; Grants execution of arbitral award","author":"Arunima","date":"February 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"If the part of an Award proposed to be annulled is independent, stands unattached to the other part and can be validly incised, the partial setting aside would be valid and justified. The same also applies to execution proceedings.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339737","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=339737"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339737\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/339752"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=339737"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=339737"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=339737"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}