Madras High Court Adjudicates Criminal Original Petition No.31787 of 2024 — Outcome and Issues Not Extractable from Corrupted OCR Text
4 Mar 2025...
Search Results for "imminent possibility"
181 result(s) found
Found 181 result(s)
High Court
Madras High Court Rehears Interlocutory Applications in Trademark Dispute for Interim Injunction. Court Directed to Apply Trinity Tests and Consider Section 12-A Compliance and Order 2 Rule 2 Bar After Remand by Division Bench.
5 Feb 2025The Madras High Court reheard two interlocutory applications in a commercial suit involving a trademark dispute over the 'Massey Ferguson' brand. Trac...
- 43
High Court
Bombay High Court Considers Maintainability of Commercial Appeals Against Interim Orders in Trademark Infringement Suits. Preliminary Objection Raised That Orders Impugned Do Not Fall Within Appealable Categories Under Section 13(1A) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 as Amended.
17 Oct 2018These two commercial appeals were filed by the original defendants in intellectual property suits pending before the Bombay High Court. The suits, ins...
- 37
High Court
Bombay High Court on its Own Motion Proceeds Against Individual for Scandalous Facebook Posts Targeting Judges. Court Stresses That Such Vicious Attacks on Judiciary Constitute Gross Criminal Contempt Undermining Rule of Law.
11 Oct 2018Suo-motu criminal contempt proceedings were initiated by the Bombay High Court against an individual who, through his Facebook profile, published a se...
- 13
High Court
High Court of Judicature at Bombay Nagpur Bench Full Bench Answers Reference on Admissibility of Dying Declaration Without Reading Over to Declarant. Reference Framed by Division Bench in Ganpat Bakaramji Lad v. State of Maharashtra to Settle Conflict on Whether Dying Declaration Must Be Read Over and Admitted to Be Correct.
9 Mar 2018This Full Bench judgment arises from Criminal Appeal No. 186 of 2013 before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. The appellant, Ganpat Bakaramji...
- 14
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against State's Allotment of Surplus Land Under ULC Act — Petitioner Failed to Establish Any Right After Repeal. Land vested in the State under Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, prior to its repeal, remains with the State and cannot revert merely because the Act was subsequently repealed.
27 Oct 2016The matter before the Bombay High Court arose from a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Chhaganlal Khimji and Co. L...
High Court
Karnataka High Court Allows Wife's Appeal in Matrimonial Dispute Under Indian Divorce Act — Restitution of Conjugal Rights Dismissed, Divorce Granted on Grounds of Cruelty and Adultery. Wife's Petition for Restitution Allowed and Husband's Divorce Petition Dismissed as Grounds Not Proven.
29 Sep 2015The case involves two appeals filed by the wife, Mrs. Mabel Treeza Pinto, against a common judgment and decree dated 20.1.2011 passed by the Principal...
- 40
High Court
Bombay High Court Examines Validity of Notification Exempting Light Motor Vehicles and MSRTC Buses from Toll on Sion-Panvel Highway. Dispute Arises from Concession Agreement Where Petitioner Alleges Arbitrary Exemptions Cause Substantial Daily Revenue Loss and Contradicts Terms of Agreement.
8 Sep 2015The dispute arose from a concession agreement for widening and maintaining an arterial highway from Mumbai to Panvel, awarded to M/s Sion Panvel Tollw...
High Court
High Court of Bombay Hears Appeal Against Conviction Under Section 120B r/w 302 IPC. Conviction Stemmed from Alleged Conspiracy to Murder Inder Bhatija by Accused No.1 and Others.
14 Oct 2014The appeal arose from the conviction and sentence of accused No.1 Pappu @ Suresh Budharmal Kalani by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Sessions...
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Land Acquisition Challenges by Landowners in KIADB Proceedings — Preliminary Notification Under Section 28(1) of KIAD Act Not Quashed Despite Alleged Non-Compliance with Section 28(2) and Section 28(4). The court held that the petitioners were guilty of delay and laches and had no locus standi to challenge the acquisition after the final notification was issued.
12 Nov 2013The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by landowners challenging the acquisition of their lands by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development...
- 71
