Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court stated that Applicants 5 to 8, being maternal uncles and their wives, are only instrumental in introducing Applicant 1’a marriage proposal to the complainant and it cannot be said that they knew about his condition.

Continue reading
Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

There is sufficient material collected during investigation to indicate that the incident did take place and that slapping ‘G’ is an offence under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Continue reading
Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Miraj passed an order thereby correcting petitioner’s date of birth and therefore, the District Collector, Sangli was directed to issue notice to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tasgaon, asking for an explanation, as to how he could record the date of birth as 02-06-1972.

Continue reading
Gauhati High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Though the air fare of the chartered flight from Guwahati to Jeddah was collected from the pilgrims, however, during the boarding at Guwahati, pilgrims of Assam were asked to take normal passenger flight instead of international chartered flight.

Continue reading
Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Section 22(1) of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 provides for change when same is desired in the interest of the administration of public trust, therefore, changing name at the behest of and on the directions of Charity Commissioner will not fall within the provisions of Section 22(1) of the said Act.

Continue reading
Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

To attract the offence under Section 3061 of the Penal Code, 1860, clear mens rea to commit the offence must be established on applicant-accused’s part, as it requires active/direct act, leading the deceased to commit suicide.

Continue reading
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