It was claimed in Hamdard National Foundation v. Hussain Dalal, 202 (2013) DLT 291 Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani (2013, Dir. Ayan Mukherjee) contains some dialogues which injures the goodwill and reputation of Rooh Afza, a popular concentrated squash. It was admitted, Rooh Afza is a well-known trademark. Attention was drawn to Section 29(9) of The […]Read more "Rooh Afza Returns"
In Lau v. Chu,  1 WLR 4656 House of Lords indicated, “just and equitable winding up may be ordered where the company’s members have fallen out in two related but distinct situations, which may or may not overlap.” The first of these is labelled as “functional dead lock” of a paralyzing kind, clearly recognized […]Read more "Functional Dead Lock"
High Courts in India as well as Supreme Court recognize Doctrine of Indirect Discrimination. Only by exercising close scrutiny and exhibiting attentiveness to the possibility of alternatives can a Court ensure, full potential of Doctrine of Indirect Discrimination is realized and not lost in its application. _____ In a case of direct discrimination, judicial enquiry […]Read more "The Doctrine of Indirect Discrimination"
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration v. Pradeep Kumar, (2018) 1 SCC 797 dealt with the expression “honourable acquittal”. It was opined, acquittal in a criminal case was not conclusive for suitability of the candidate concerned and it could not always be inferred from an acquittal or discharge that the person was falsely involved or has no […]Read more "Suitability of Candidate II / Honourable Acquittal"
There is no doubt on the principles that, depending upon context, the same word may be used in different parts of the statute with different meanings and the same word in the context of one provision of the enactment may convey one meaning and another meaning in different context. However, it is also fundamental that, […]Read more "Same Words, Different Meanings"
Court will not debate academic matters or concern itself with intricacies of trade and commerce. Legislature should be allowed some play in the joints, because it has to deal with complex problems which do not admit of solution through any doctrinaire or straitjacket formula and this is particularly true in case of legislation dealing with […]Read more "Unchartered Ocean of Policy Decision II"
N.V. International v. State of Assam, (2020) 2 SCC 109 has been wrongly decided and is therefore overruled. For appeals filed under Section 37 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 that are governed by Articles 116 and 117 of The Limitation Act, 1963 or Section 13(1A) of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 a delay […]Read more "Section 37 of The Arbitration Act III"
NCDRC dismissed a Consumer Case, instituted under Act of 1986 on 18.06.2020, on the ground, after enforcement of Act of 2019, pecuniary jurisdiction of NCDRC has been enhanced from Rupees One Crore to Rupees Ten Crores. The decision has been set aside. _____ A change in forum lies in the realm of procedure. Accordingly, in […]Read more "Act of 1986 v. Act of 2019"
It is well settled, actions of the State with oblique or indirect object will be attributed to ‘malice in law’. Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania,(2010) 9 SCC 437 has summarized as follows: “Where malice is attributed to the State, it can never be a case of personal ill will or spite on the part […]Read more "Legal Malice II"
The conditions that are required to be fulfilled for invoking the provisions of Section 14 of The Limitation Act, 1963 have been succinctly spelt out in Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, (2008) 7 SCC 169 . The question as to whether Section 14 would also be applicable to Quasi-Judicial Forums as against […]Read more "Quasi-Judicial II / The Plea of Limitation XV: Causes of Justice II"
The 1996 Act has been framed for expeditious resolution of disputes. Various time lines have been provided [Section 8; Section 9(2); Section 13; Section 16(2); Section 34(3)]. The 1996 Act was amended by The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 to incorporate further provisions for expeditious disposal of Arbitral Proceedings [Section 11(13); Section 29A; Section […]Read more "Section 11(6) of The Arbitration Act IV"
Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. v. General Electric Company, (1984) 4 SCC 679 held, “expressions such as “arising out of” or “in respect of” or “in connection with” or “in relation to” or “in consequence of” or “concerning” or “relating to” the contract are of the widest amplitude and content.” Mansukhlal Dhanraj Jain v. Eknath Vithal […]Read more "Arising Out Of / Relating To"
Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 3 SCC 92 held, if an interpretation leads to a conclusion that the word used by the Legislature is redundant, it should be avoided as the presumption is Legislature has deliberately and consciously used the word of carrying out the purpose of the Act. The legal maxim ‘a […]Read more "A Verbis Legis Non Est Recedendum"
Over the last five decades, several decisions have dealt with the fundamental issue of when the process of an examination can stand vitiated. Essentially, the answer to the issue turns upon whether the irregularities in the process have taken place at a systemic level so as to vitiate the sanctity of the process. There are […]Read more "The Revival of Ray LXIII"
The expression ‘copyright’ has to be understood only as is stated in Section 14 and not otherwise. It is an exclusive right, which is negative in nature, being a right to restrict others from doing certain acts. The ownership of copyright in a work is different from the ownership of the physical material in which […]Read more "The Copyright Act, 1957"
Section 31(1) is couched in mandatory terms. There can be no finality of Arbitral Award, except after it is signed, since signing of the Award gives legal effect and validity to it. The usage of the term ‘shall’ makes it a mandatory requirement. It is not merely a ministerial act, or an empty formality which […]Read more "Section 31(5) of The Arbitration Act"
A reading [State of Assam v. Ranga Mahammad, (1967) 1 SCR 454; Jagdish Chander Gupta v. Kajaria Traders (India) Ltd., (1964) 8 SCR 50; Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal, (1967) 3 SCR 377; CBI v. Braj Bhushan Prasad, (2001) 9 SCC 432; Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. v. State of U.P., (2005) 2 SCC […]Read more "Civil Sheep & Criminal Wolf"
Where a High Court construes a local statute, ordinarily deference must be given to the High Court Judgments in interpreting such a statute, particularly when they have stood the test of time [State of Gujarat v. Zinabhai Ranchhodji Darji, (1972) 1 SCC 233 at Paragraph 10; Bishamber Dass Kohli v. Satya Bhalla, (1993) 1 SCC […]Read more "Interpretation of Local Statutes by High Courts / The Revival of Ray LXII"
“In every case where a statute inflicts a penalty for doing an act, though the act be not prohibited, yet the thing is unlawful, because it is not intended that a statute would inflict a penalty for a lawful act. It is a question of construction in each case whether the Legislature intended to prohibit […]Read more "The Revival of Ray LXI"
One of the meanings of expression ‘inconsistent’ as approved by this Court is mutually repugnant or contradictory. Constitution itself has used the words ‘inconsistency’ and ‘repugnancy’ interchangeably. Things are inconsistent when they cannot stand together at the same time and one law is inconsistent with another law, when the command or power or provision in […]Read more "The Question of Apparent Conflict"