Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
A plain reading of Section 32A IBC reveals that once a resolution plan is approved under Section 31, the Corporate Debtor shall not be prosecuted for an offence committed prior to the commencement of the CIRP. However, this immunity does not extend to the erstwhile officers and persons responsible for the conduct of its business prior to CIRP.
The Supreme Court, in its order dated 19-12-2024, provided specific guidelines regarding the reservation of posts for women and the election process. These directions necessitated a review of the existing election framework by the Delhi High Court, which had earlier scheduled the elections for 07-02-2025.
The petitions raise a common grievance that a Movie titled as “2020 Delhi” of which a ‘trailer’ is accessible on social media, depicts a highly prejudicial and distorted account of the riots that took place in North-East Delhi in February, 2020, and thereby create a false and disruptive narrative having serious repercussions.
A payment made for use of goodwill cannot possibly be viewed as being an illegal purpose or one prohibited by law. A person would be obliged to part with consideration for the use of goodwill if it seeks to derive benefit and advantage therefrom.
There was no compelling material or evidence placed on record to establish that the continuation of criminal proceedings in the present case amounts to an abuse of the process of law
An entire syndicate with established network and properly defined roles exists and operates at different levels, which, when taken into consideration in entirety, clearly indicates that the proceeds of crime are more than Rs. 1 Crore.
The language in the legal notice completely scandalises the Court and raises baseless allegations and aspersions against the administration of justice by the Court by raising doubts about the functioning of the Registry of this Court.
When a terrorist organization like LeT is involved, which has already taken responsibility for various terror attacks in India, the tacit or active support to such an organization cannot be condoned in any manner.
The Court observed that the petitioner truthfully disclosed the pendency of a criminal case against him, when during the training, he along with other candidates were directed to furnish the relevant information.
The plaintiff was shocked to find that the defendant unilaterally uploaded a short video clip of the interview on Instagram without prior approval displaying the defendant’s logo, ‘Miss Malini,’ while deliberately obscuring the plaintiff’s ‘Mirchi®’ logo, violating the agreement on usage permissions.
The similarity between the conflicting marks ‘IKEA’ and ‘IKEY’ is such that it cannot be mere co-incidence and a case of ignorance.
The petitioner made a tweet via his Twitter handle and made a post on his Facebook account regarding the presence of the ‘Shiva Linga’ like structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh which reads as “Yadi yeh Shiv Ling hai to Lagta hai shayad Shiv ji ka bhi khatna kar diya gaya tha”
It would be a travesty of justice if the petitioner were denied the benefit of circular merely on the ground that his mother does not have a decree of divorce or separation from a court of law.
The expression “plant and machinery” has been defined by the Explanation appearing in Section 17(5) of CGST Act to mean apparatus, equipment and machinery fixed to earth by foundation or structural support. However, it specifically excludes telecommunication towers from the ambit of the expression “plant and machinery”.
Even though in a departmental inquiry, the standard of proof is preponderance of probability, the onus to establish the charges is on the department through the Presenting Officer and once the evidence is led, the IO is required to look into the evidence of the prosecution and the defence and come to a finding, after analysis and deliberations.
A statutory authority when faced with such a challenge would be obligated to prove that it was either impracticable to proceed or it was constricted by factors beyond its control which prevented it from moving with reasonable expedition.
These petitioners, who had not even applied under the second scheme cannot be permitted to challenge the same, that too, at a belated stage i.e. after four years of the closure of such scheme.
It is the case of the petitioner that they have been using the mark “JACK DANIEL’S” since 1895 in respect of alcoholic beverages. The petitioner is the registered proprietor of various trademarks including “JACK DANIEL’S” and other formative parts.
Special statutes have stringent conditions for grant of bail but they should not become means to detain the accused without there being any possibility of concluding the trial, expeditiously. Merely charging an accused person under the provisions of these special statutes should not become a punishment in itself which violates Article 21.
Mankind Pharma used the mark “MANKIND” since 1986 and holds 78 separate trademark registrations covering a variety of pharmaceutical products. The concern arose when Novakind adopted the name “NOVAKIND” for its pharmaceutical products.