Search Results for "substantial damage"

914 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 914 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Interim Injunction in Trademark Infringement Suit Over 'MAUJ' vs 'MOJ' — No Deceptive Similarity Found. Phonetic and structural comparison of marks 'MAUJ' and 'MOJ' held not deceptively similar; plaintiff failed to establish prima facie case for interim relief.

The plaintiff, Mauj Mobile Private Limited, filed a commercial IP suit alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MAUJ' (registered in Classes...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Negligence of ST Bus Driver Established. Compensation Enhanced from Rs. 1,08,000 to Rs. 3,24,000 with 6% Interest.

The appellants, being the parents and minor brother of the deceased Jakir Tamboli, filed a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Summons in Defamation Case Against Newspaper Publisher and Editor for Reporting FIR — Reporting of Police Press Release Constitutes Fair Comment and Substantial Truth Under Exception 1 to Section 499 IPC.

The petitioners, Manish Karapurkar (Publisher) and K. R. Sreenivas (Editor) of The Times of India, Goa Edition, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under S...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding-Up Petition Against Sundeep Polymers Due to Bona Fide Dispute Over Hire Purchase Agreement. Dispute Regarding Defective Vehicle and Pending Consumer Complaint Constitutes Substantial Grounds, Not a Mere Debt Acknowledgment.

The petitioning-creditor, Tata Motors Ltd (formerly Tata Finance Ltd), filed a winding-up petition under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 19...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Production of Additional Documents in Civil Suit — Emphasizes Liberal Approach Under CPC Order 13 Rule 1. The Court held that mere delay or suspicion of afterthought is not sufficient to reject documents if no prejudice is caused and cross-examination is ongoing.

The petitioners, defendants in a civil suit for refund of advance of Rs.30 lakhs, filed an application during cross-examination of their witness (DW.1...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Rejection of Additional Documents in Civil Suit — Belated Filing to Fill Lacuna Not Permitted. Trial court's discretion to reject application for producing resolution and letter of authority during cross-examination upheld as no justifiable cause shown.

The petitioners, M/s. BGC International Pvt. Ltd. and Mr. Balaji Pothraj, were defendants in Special Civil Suit No. 22/2007/A filed by the respondents...