Uno Minda v. Minda Uto

Plaintiffs cannot seek a restraint against Defendants from using their registered trademark ‘MINDA UTO’ for Plaintiffs do not have registration for said goods under Class 04 while Defendants do. In view of Section 31 of The Trade Marks Act, 1999 registration of the trademark is prima facie evidence of its validity in favor of Defendants. […]

Read more "Uno Minda v. Minda Uto"

Star

HTC Corporation v. L.V. Degao, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 953 has held, where there are two registered trademarks, registration of the later trade mark may be refused or cancelled: (i) when deception or confusion results, (ii) there is a dishonest user, (iii) subsequent use is without due cause, (iv) there is bad faith, or (v) […]

Read more "Star"

Locus Standi in Access to Justice

If persons who participated in a selection process but who could not make it to the final list of selected candidates on account of alleged corrupt practices adopted by those in power are not ‘victims’, we do not know who else could be a ‘victim’. Section 2(wa) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Hon’ble […]

Read more "Locus Standi in Access to Justice"

Fourth Schedule Fee

Amendments made by Arbitration Amendment Act, 2019 have been somewhat a non-starter. _____ Fourth Schedule came into effect on 23.10.2015. Fourth Schedule is not applicable to International Commercial Arbitrations and where Arbitrators’ Fees are to be determined in accordance with Rules of Arbitral Institutions. _____ Arbitrator’s Fees must be fixed at inception to avoid unnecessary […]

Read more "Fourth Schedule Fee"

Bolt, Pre-Litigation Mediation

Estonia-based-Plaintiff submits, Defendants are using an identical mark ‘BOLT’ with an identical color scheme. Plaintiff: SC has held, when an urgent interim relief is being sought, suit can be filed without resorting to pre-litigation mediation. Defendants: SC has held, with effect from 20.08.2022, pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is […]

Read more "Bolt, Pre-Litigation Mediation"

[Rank] Investigation III

Section 18 of The Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 uses the expression, “not below the rank of the Superintendent of Police.” Nine-Judge Bench in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, (1993) 4 SCC 441 observed, “not only is the word ‘primacy’ inextricably linked up with the words ’rank’ and ‘precedence’ but […]

Read more "[Rank] Investigation III"

Writ Against Termination of Service by Private Bodies

St. Mary’s Education Society, registered under The Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973, runs St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School in Mhow, Indore, Madhya Pradesh. St. Mary’s Education Society and St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School are absolutely private institutions, without any aid or control of Government or any instrumentality of Government, and therefore, not a ‘State’ […]

Read more "Writ Against Termination of Service by Private Bodies"

Pension is Not a Bounty III

Justice S. Talapatra along with Chief Justice T. Vaiphei, as Judges of High Court of Tripura on 31.10.2017, struck down Rule 3(3) of The Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pension) Rules, 2009. At present, Justice S. Talapatra is Judge No. 3 at High Court of Orissa.   _____ When specific statistics were provided before High […]

Read more "Pension is Not a Bounty III"

Referred to Larger Bench XXX: Section 12(5) of The Arbitration Act V

Three Judges, on 11.01.2021, in Union of India v. M/s. Tantia Constructions Limited, Special Leave Petition (Civil) 12670 of 2020 prima facie disagreed with Three Judges in Central Organisation for Railway Electrification v. M/s. ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV), Civil Appeal No. 9486-9487 of 2019. Three Judges, on 16.08.2022, in JSW Steel v. South Western Railway, Special Leave […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XXX: Section 12(5) of The Arbitration Act V"

No Bottle, Just Bottle I

Plaintiffs claim, lock, stock and barrel copying by Defendant. Defendant labels both Plaintiffs and itself as pirates, sailing in high seas of prior art(s). Hipster Bottles were launched by Plaintiff No. 1 in India in May, 2019. Plaintiff No. 1 is Proprietor of Registered Design No. 306577 in terms of Section 2(1)(j) of The Designs […]

Read more "No Bottle, Just Bottle I"

Provocation

Dauvram, for murder of Brother-Dashrath, was convicted under Section 302, IPC. In our opinion, this case will fall under Exception 1 to Section 300, IPC. K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, 1962 Supp (1) SCR 567 interpreted Exception 1 to Section 300. For determining whether or not the provocation had temporarily deprived power of self-control, […]

Read more "Provocation"

Comparative Advertising I

Marico’s grievance pertains to Dabur. It is alleged, impugned advertisements convey a clear message: Marico’s product is ineffective and useless. On behalf of Dabur it is contended, impugned advertisements are protected under Article 19(1)(a) and are legitimate, honest, truthful, well substantiated and statistically proven.   A balance has to be struck. An advertiser cannot, while […]

Read more "Comparative Advertising I"

Burden of Proof

It is trite to refer to tenets laid down in Palermo and Vienna Conventions. There has been a consensus, acquisition-possession-use-concealing or disguising illicit origin of illegitimately obtained money to evade legal consequences would be money-laundering. However, growth of jurisprudence in this law did not stop or end…    _____ We hold, Section 24 of The […]

Read more "Burden of Proof"

5 Lakhs for Supreme Court II

Himanshu Kumar claims to be running an NGO: Vanvasi Chetna Ashram. Himanshu’s Writ Petition relates to an alleged massacre on 17th September, 2009 and 1st October, 2009 in Gachhanpalli, Gompad and Belpocha situated in District of Dantewada, State of Chhattisgarh. An aggrieved person can only claim, offence he alleges be investigated properly. But, he has […]

Read more "5 Lakhs for Supreme Court II"