Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The rival marks are structurally, phonetically, and visually identical and/or deceptively similar when compared as a whole and the word ‘HIRECT’ is the important, prominent, and essential feature of the plaintiff’s registered mark.

Continue reading
Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Every trade mark registration is separate and independent and a disclaimer in one registration cannot be read or imported into another. In comparing marks as a whole, mere addition of a generic prefix by defendant will not negate the actionable similarity between the rival marks where defendants’ mark contains whole of applicant’s mark (particularly the distinctive/leading/memorable/essential feature).

Continue reading
Gauhati High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The issue raised is of substantial importance particularly to those residing in rural areas and not having access to adequate and sufficient medical and health necessities by way of hospitals and other ancillary facilities offered in those hospitals.

Continue reading
Telangana High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

There exists no power under Section 101 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 to introduce an independent provision like Section 10-A in Telangana (Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalization of Staff Pattern and Pat Structure) Act, 1994, which runs contrary to an existing provision i.e., the Andhra Pradesh Intermediate Education Service Rules, without amending, modifying, or repealing it.

Continue reading
Patna High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Trial Court did not notice the facts that the offence was committed in 2014 and at that time there was no such punishment as rigorous imprisonment for the remainder of natural life in Section 6 of POCSO Act.

Continue reading