Search Results for "Disclaimer"

133 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 133 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Section 11 Application for Appointment of Arbitrator in Coal Supply Dispute Due to Absence of Arbitration Agreement in Purchase Orders. Tax Invoices with Arbitration Clause Not Binding as They Were Unilateral and Not Accepted by Respondent.

The applicant, Hitesh Coal Traders, filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows State Appeal in Tender Cancellation Case — Public Interest Justifies Cancellation of LoI Despite Prior Acceptance. Non-Arbitrariness in State Action Not Established When Cancellation is Based on Legitimate Concerns Over Technical Compliance and Financial Viability.

The dispute arose from a tender issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh for the supply, installation, and maintenance of electronic Point-of-Sale (ePO...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition in Trademark Infringement Case, Upholds Trial Court's Refusal to Stay Suit Pending Rectification. Civil Court Has Concurrent Jurisdiction to Decide Infringement and Validity of Trademark Under Section 124 of Trade Marks Act, 1999.

The petitioners, M/s. Sri Laxmi Balaji Industries and M/s. Sri Laxmi Vinayaka Rice Industries, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Trademark and Copyright Infringement Suit Over 'SUKOON' Mark for Ayurvedic Massage Oil. Plaintiff's Prior Use Since 1993 and Distinctive Label Establish Prima Facie Case for Injunction Against Defendant's Identical Mark.

The plaintiff, Shafeeque Ahmed Mohammad Sayeed, trading as M/s. Nageena Ayurvedic Pharmacy, filed a suit against the defendant, Ansari Bilal Ahmadlal ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds MEP Notification for Iron Ore and Steel Products as Valid Exercise of Power Under Foreign Trade Act. Court holds that Minimum Export Price is a reasonable condition for export licensing and does not violate fundamental rights.

The petitioners, JSW Steel Limited and Welspun Tradings Limited, along with their officers, challenged the constitutional validity of the Minimum Expo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Revision Against Eviction Order Under MMC Act — Agreement for Sale Does Not Confer Corporation Premises Status. Premises Not Owned or Vested in MCGM, Hence Eviction Proceedings Under Chapter VA of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 Not Maintainable.

The case involves a Civil Revision Application filed by the legal representatives of late Laxman Keshav Kudalkar against an eviction order passed by t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeals in Rent Control Cases, Upholds Appellate Court's Finding of No Tenancy. Landlord's Suit for Possession Fails as Tenant Proves Payment of Rent and Absence of Valid Termination Under Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947.

The appellant, Radhyesham Ramkaran Choube, filed four second appeals (Second Appeal Nos. 4, 8, 11, and 16 of 2002) against a common judgment dated 10....

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Notice of Motion in Trademark Infringement Suit Due to Delay and Lack of Urgency. Plaintiffs' claim for interim injunction rejected as they failed to establish prima facie case and balance of convenience.

The plaintiffs, Lokhandwala Construction Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Lokhandwala Builders Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

NCLAT Upholds Preferential Transaction Findings in Insolvency Case — Two Transactions Totaling Rs. 1.60 Crore Held as Preferential Under Section 43 of IBC, 2016. The Tribunal Confirms That Payments Made to Related Parties During the Look-Back Period Are Voidable and Must Be Reversed.

The case involves an appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed by H.P. Arun Kumar, C.M. Nagaraj, and Usha (Appellants...