Bhagwati, CJ in Sheonandan Paswan v. State of Bihar, (1987) 1 SCC 288 observed, a complaint being initiated by reason of political vendetta is not in itself a ground for quashing criminal proceedings. It is well-established, a criminal prosecution, if otherwise justified and based upon adequate evidence, does not become vitiated on account of mala […]
Read more "Political Vendetta"Anil Kumar Upadhyay was serving as a Head Constable (Ministerial) in 15th Battalion of Sashastra Seema Bal, Bongaigaon. He was charged under Section 43 of The Shashastra Seema Bal Act, 2007 for entering Mahila Barrack at around 00:15 AM on intervening night of 14th-15th April, 2013. He was imposed punishment of ‘removal from service’. His […]
Read more "Disciplinary Proceedings VIII"Dr. Harish Kumar Khurana v. Joginder Singh, (2021) 10 SCC 291 held, hospital and doctors are required to exercise sufficient care in treating patients in all circumstances. However, in an unfortunate case, death may occur. It is necessary, sufficient material on medical evidence is available to conclude: death is due to medical negligence. A medical […]
Read more "Medical Negligence and Consumer Law III"Having regard to circumstances, preceding and following deceased being last seen together with accused, Court has no hesitation in holding, prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt all circumstances, so conclusive as to rule out possibility of any other hypothesis except guilt. We deem it proper to commute Death Sentence to Life Imprisonment. The only […]
Read more "Review of Death Penalty XXVI"M. Duraisamy was serving as a Postal Assistant. He committed fraud and admitted so. M. Duraisamy deposited entire defrauded amount. He was imposed penalty of ‘removal’. Central Administrative Tribunal modified punishment from ‘removal’ to ‘compulsory retirement’. Chairman & Managing Director, V.S.P. v. Goparaju Sri Prabhakara Hari Babu, (2008) 5 SCC 569 observed, once all procedural […]
Read more "Disciplinary Proceedings VII"According to Snapdeal, by offering for registration, domain names which include ‘Snapdeal’, Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) are facilitating infringement of Snapdeal’s registered mark and are also themselves infringers within meaning of Sections 28 and 29 of The Trade Marks Act, 1999. If domain names are deceptively similar to ‘Snapdeal’, GoDaddy is indulging in infringement of […]
Read more "Domain Name I"It is quite extraordinary, how word mark ‘Ganesh’ was registered without any restriction or limitation. When a mark is registered, Registering Authority may do so without any condition or limitation. Absence of a disclaimer does not always vest an exclusive right over a word mark. In our case, registration of word mark ‘Ganesh’ was without […]
Read more "Name of God"My Lord, Revocation Petition under Section 64 of The Patents Act, 1970 is subject to The Limitation Act, 1963? No. Section 2(1)(t) of The Patents Act, 1970 defines a ‘person interested’. Aloys Wobben v. Yogesh Mehra, (2014) 15 SCC 360 observed, a person may not be a ‘person interested’ when grant of concerned patent was […]
Read more "Section 64 of The Patents Act, 1970 I"Bharat Damodar Kale v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2003) 8 SCC 559 and Japani Sahoo v. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty, (2007) 7 SCC 394 as against Krishna Pillai v. T.A. Rajendran, 1990 (Supp.) SCC 121 was Referred to a Three Judge Bench which in turn Referred to a Larger Bench. Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardio […]
Read more "Section 468 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973"The maxim ‘res ipsa loquitur’ is resorted to when an accident is shown to have occurred and cause of accident is primarily within knowledge of Defendant. The cause of accident being unknown does not prevent Plaintiff from recovering damages, if proper inference to be drawn from circumstances which are known is: it was caused by […]
Read more "Res Ipsa Loquitur I"It is abundantly clear, Principle of Promissory Estoppel cannot be invoked for enforcing promises in teeth of provisions of law [Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills, (1979) 2 SCC 409; Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd., (1992) 2 SCC 411; Bangalore Development Authority v. R. Hanumaiah, (2005) 12 SCC 508; State of Gujarat v. Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India […]
Read more "Promissory Estoppel IX"The distinction between a disturbance to ‘law and order’ and a disturbance to ‘public order’ has been clearly settled by a Constitution Bench in Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC 740. Court has held, every ‘disorder’ does not meet threshold of a disturbance to ‘public order’, unless it affects community at […]
Read more "Preventive Detention Statute III"“Basic Structure Doctrine is applicable in Kenya” had only Lady Justice, Fatuma Sichale’s Dissent. My Lord, Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission v. David Ndii, Petition No. 12 of 2021 before Supreme Court of Kenya at Nairobi? 6-1, Friend. Lady Justice, P.M. Mwilu, Deputy Chief Justice & Vice-President of Supreme Court of Kenya: If there were […]
Read more "The Doctrine of Basic Structure III"The principle laid down in Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Govindan Raghvan, (2019) 5 SCC 725 has been followed consistently in many cases where terms of an Apartment Buyer’s Agreement were found to be one-sided. The following are instances where terms of an Apartment Buyer’s Agreement were found to be oppressive, constituting an […]
Read more "Apartment Buyer’s Agreement"A mere differential treatment on its own cannot be termed as an anathema to Article 14. When there is a reasonable basis for a classification adopted by taking note of exigencies and diverse situations, Court is not expected to insist on absolute equality by taking a rigid and pedantic view as against a pragmatic one. […]
Read more "Unchartered Ocean of Policy Decision IV"While right to property is no longer a fundamental right [The Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978], right against deprivation of property, unless in accordance with procedure established by law, continues to be a constitutional right under Article 300-A. Nobody can be deprived of liberty or property without due process or authorization of law. The […]
Read more "Right to Property I"Plaintiff and Defendant manufacture and deal in, inter alia, high-end luxury jewellery. Where a website permits purchase of goods or services, for consideration, every Court having jurisdiction over places from which, by access to website, commercial transactions could be effected and concluded would, prima facie, have jurisdiction to deal with a case of trademark infringement. […]
Read more "Serpenti"T. Arivandandam v. T.V. Satyapal, (1977) 4 SCC 467; Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandhi, 1986 Supp SCC 315; Sopan Sukhdeo Sable v. Assistant Charity Commissioner, (2004) 3 SCC 137; Rajendra Bajoria v. Hemant Kumar Jalan, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 764. Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali, (2020) 7 SCC 366 had an occasion to consider various […]
Read more "The Drastic Power of Rejecting a Plaint V"A party should not be penalized for failing to adopt legal proceedings when facts or documents have been wilfully concealed from him. A party who had acted fraudulently should not be given benefit of limitation, running in its favor, by virtue of such frauds [Pallav Sheth v. Custodian, (2001) 7 SCC 549]. Section 17 of […]
Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XXVII: The Drastic Power of Rejecting a Plaint IV"It is more than well-settled, Court has to avoid interpretations which will result in a head-on clash between two Sections of an Act. One provision has to be construed with reference to other provisions, so as to make a consistent enactment. Mahadeo Prasad Bais (Dead) v. Income-Tax Officer ‘A’ Ward, Gorakhpur, (1991) 4 SCC 560 […]
Read more "Backdrop of Dominant Purpose II"
The Last Word 
You must be logged in to post a comment.