Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court stated that Defendants 1,8, 9 and 10 are engaged in illegal activities, which are potentially criminal in nature, and are aimed at deceiving unwary consumers by making them pay through their website under the false pretence of securing reservations with the plaintiff’s ‘GINGER’ hotels.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Despite having multiple opportunities to report the alleged acts, complainant remained silent. Her complaint came only after the pregnancy was discovered. The Court stated that these facts lend credence to the possibility that the FIR was a reaction to social pressure and the nature of the relationship was re-cast retrospectively to explain an unwanted pregnancy.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The unauthorized actions of Defendant 1, including the creation and operation of fraudulent WhatsApp/Telegram groups, websites and mobile apps, have given rise to substantial confusion, leading individuals to falsely believe that the impugned groups and website are affiliated with plaintiff.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Despite Respondent 1’s endeavour to create distinctions, it is crystal clear that the marks are confusingly/deceptively similar to the petitioner’s registered trade mark. Such use of a similar mark would invariably mislead consumers and members into believing that the goods under the impugned mark were sourced from the petitioner.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The systematic, organised and intentional nature of the infringement, and the regularity and consistency with which the said content is being updated/ uploaded on the said “rogue websites” shows the extent of the violation of the rights of the plaintiff in real time.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court stated that the mala fide intent of Defendants 7 and 8, is evident from their infringing activity of selling counterfeit products bearing the plaintiff’s trade mark with the sole objective of capitalizing on the immense goodwill and brand image enjoyed by the plaintiff.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The accused, despite being fully aware of the age difference, actively pursued the relationship, gave assurances of marriage, and induced the victim to make financial and emotional commitments.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The CCTV footage exhibited before the Court does not clearly reveal the shooter’s identity. Moreover, the forensic analysis of the CCTV footage and the Call Detail Records analysis of the accused’s mobile phone is still pending. Therefore, the Court refrains from drawing any conclusions at this stage.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Accessibility Audit Report revealed an alarming state of affairs inasmuch as 207 accessibility issues is identified in the ‘Rapido Android App’. Notably, 81 of these issues are referred to as “High Impact (P0)”.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, the Court will not ordinarily embark upon an inquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it the accusations will not be sustained, as that is the function of the Trial Court.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Petitioner averred that on account of COVID-19 pandemic, he was unable to operate his SMU and therefore, in light of a policy decision taken by the respondents to give extension, treating the pandemic period as dies non, benefit of extension was granted to the petitioner up to 16-03-2025.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The long duration and wide geographical area for which the TAJ marks have been in use, their goodwill and reputation due to the extensive promotion and extensive revenue generated by the plaintiff, in India and other countries, the TAJ marks have achieved the status of well-known trade marks.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot exercise the administrative power of transfer of case from one Court to another within its jurisdiction, unless an order is passed by the High Court under Section 10(2) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“It is a matter of record that the female athletes have brought significant sporting glory to the country and this Court cannot countenance a situation where equilibrium is not maintained between the male and female contingents in sporting events.”

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

There can be no doubt unnecessary aggression and raising of voice in Court which demonstrates disrespect cannot be tolerated. Lawyers are ought to maintain decorum in the court room.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Defendant 3 has taken unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff’s trade marks/artistic works and has also deceived the unwary consumers of their association with the plaintiff by dishonestly adopting the plaintiff’s registered marks/labels without any plausible explanation.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The petitioner has filed an affidavit of the authorized representative of an independent investigating agency to support its averments regarding non-use of the impugned mark by Respondent 1 in relation to the services in class 35 for nearly 8 years up to the date of filing of the present petition.

Continue reading
actionable claim
Cases ReportedNever Reported Judgments

This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on actionable claim dating back to the year 1954.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The jurisdiction available to this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution is primarily in the nature of superintendence and accordingly the Letters Patent Appeal will not lie in the instant matter.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Since the Call Detail Records and location data have only been ordered to be preserved and not disclosed, there is no basis for the petitioner’s apprehension that this would provide an undue advantage to the defence. The direction simply ensures that potentially relevant evidence is not lost due to automatic deletion.

Continue reading