Search Results for "arbitrary mark"

444 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 444 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Confiscation of Lithium Ion Cells for Want of Show Cause Notice; Section 124 Customs Act, 1962 Mandates Prior Hearing. Non-Compliance with Natural Justice Renders Confiscation Order Void, Liberty Granted to Seek Release of Detained Goods.

Background: The petitioner, a subsidiary of Bajaj Auto Ltd., is engaged in the manufacture and sale of electric scooters and imported consignments of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Cancellation of Eligibility Certificate Under 1988 Industrial Package Scheme. The Court held that the cancellation was arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice as no show-cause notice was issued before cancellation.

The petitioner, M/s. Nav Maharashtra Cement Industries, a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, filed a writ petition un...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Refusal of Interim Injunction in Trademark 'Covishield' Passing Off Dispute. Cutis Biotech failed to establish prima facie case of passing off as the mark 'Covishield' is descriptive and not exclusively associated with the appellant.

The dispute concerns the trademark 'Covishield'. The appellant, Cutis Biotech, a sole proprietorship, filed a suit in the Commercial Court at Pune see...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Release of Imported Bearings in IPR Suspension Case — Mandamus Issued for Violation of IPR Rules 2007. Customs Authorities Suspended Clearance Without Confiscation Order or Notice Under Rule 7 of IPR Rules, Violating Principles of Natural Justice.

The petitioners, NBU Bearings Pvt. Ltd. and another, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Age Limit and Recruitment Interval Rules for Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. Rules 8(1) and 12 of UPHJS Rules, 1975 Held Valid as Not Manifestly Arbitrary Under Articles 14 and 16.

The Supreme Court considered the constitutional validity of Rules 8(1) and 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975. The petitioner...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

KAHC010159832015_1

...