Search Results for "Delay and acquiescence"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "Delay and acquiescence"

340 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 340 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Permanent Injunction in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Suit — 'HAYWARDS 5000' v. 'COX 5001'. The court held that the Defendant's mark 'COX 5001' is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's registered marks 'HAYWARDS 5000' and 'FIVE THOUSAND', constituting infringement under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and passing off under Section 135.

8 Dec 2025

The Plaintiff, Anheuser Busch Inbev India Ltd., filed a commercial suit seeking a permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, Jagpin Brewerise Lim...

High Court

Gujarat High Court Quashes Revenue Revision Order in Land Dispute — Upholds Purchaser's Title Based on Registered Sale Deed and Adverse Possession. The court held that the revisional authority exceeded its jurisdiction by reopening settled entries after 17 years without notice to the purchasers, violating principles of natural justice.

17 Feb 2026

The writ applicants, Koli Parshottambhai Narsinhbhai and another, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cha...

High Court

Bombay High Court Considers Infringement of Well-Known Mark 'Raymond' in Domain Name for Dissimilar Goods; Discusses Scope of Section 29(4) of Trade Marks Act, 1999. Domain Name 'raymondpharma.com' Not Found to Infringe 'Raymond' Mark Under Section 29(4) Due to Dissimilar Goods and Prior Litigation Bar.

20 Jul 2016

The dispute arose from the Plaintiff Raymond Limited's claim that the Defendant Raymond Pharmaceutical Pvt. Ltd. infringed its well-known registered t...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows UPPCL Appeal in Service Termination Case Due to Delay and Lack of Parity. Termination Order Was Speaking Order with Explicit Reason; Writ Petition Filed After 12 Years Dismissed for Laches.

30 Jan 2020

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Uttar Pradesh Power Corp. Ltd. (UPPCL) against the High Court's order reinstating Ram Gopal, a former Me...

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Suit Involving 'Kalpataru' Mark. The plaintiff, a well-known real estate developer, successfully restrained the defendants from using the mark 'Kalpataru' for their housing project, as it was deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered and well-known trademark.

9 Jun 2015

The plaintiff, Kalpataru Properties Pvt. Ltd., a builder and developer established in 1975, has used the mark 'Kalpataru' as an integral part of its c...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Amendment in Commercial IP Suit Due to Delay and Lack of Due Diligence. Amendment After Commencement of Trial Not Allowed Under Order VI Rule 17 CPC as Plaintiffs Failed to Show They Could Not Have Raised the Matter Earlier.

30 Nov -0001

The present Interim Application No. 752 of 2024 was filed by the original plaintiffs, Ramnish Verma and Finesse Fashions Pvt. Ltd., in a pending Comme...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Sets Aside Exparte Arbitral Award for Violation of Natural Justice and Lack of Proper Notice. Appointment of Arbitrator by Respondent Without Petitioner's Consent and Conduct of Proceedings Without Notice to Petitioner Renders Award Liable to Be Set Aside Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

7 Jan 2013

The petitioner, M/s. Zenith Fire Services (India) Private Limited, challenged an exparte arbitral award dated 31 October 2011 passed by a sole arbitra...

High Court

Gujarat High Court Allows Additional Compensation Under Section 30(3) of the 2013 Act for Land Acquired Under National Highways Act. Court Holds That Additional Compensation at 12% Is Payable on Market Value Including Multiplication Factor, and Directs Payment of Interest and Rehabilitation Benefits.

2 Mar 2026

The petitioners, whose land was acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956, filed a writ petition seeking additional compensation under Section 30...

High Court

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1659 OF 2005

1 Jan 1970

...

High Court

NOTICE OF MOTION COMMERCIAL DIVISION NO. 196 OF 2018

27 Feb 2019

...

8 9 10 11 12

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)