Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons had noticed that one businessman is running business of exchange of old and soiled currency in Chandni Chowk and he used to return to his house daily with huge cash. The bail applicant along with his associates, then hatched a criminal conspiracy to rob and kill the said businessman.

Continue reading
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court expressed concern that the accused persons took the law into their own hands without realising that their acts might affect and tarnish the image and reputation of the victims before society at large, out of whom some were girls, and one was a minor.

Continue reading
Kerala High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The true test for assessing the impact of subsequent events on the landlord’s bona fide need is whether those events completely eclipse the landlord’s need. If not, the Court can proceed with the general rule that the situation at the commencement of the litigation governs the decision.

Continue reading
Allahabad High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court noted that, during the pendency of the writ petition over the last five years, the posts in question have already been filled. Since the selections made are not under challenge, the relief sought in the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Section 28 of Customs Act, by its very nature posits, in each set of facts and circumstances, the issuance of a SCN either under Section 28(1) or under Section 28(4) of the Act and not under both. Under the circumstances, we are unable to agree that the impugned SCN under section 28(4) of the Act post the issuance of the SCN under Section 28(1) could be termed a “Supplementary Notice”.

Continue reading
Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Pleadings by themselves do not meet the requirements under Section 17 or Section 18 of the Registration Act, 1908 for registration, nor do they satisfy the definition of an “instrument” under Section 2(14) of the Stamp Act, 1899.”

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The grievance of the petitioner Bank is that notwithstanding the favourable order dated 29-06-2022, the adverse remarks recorded in the order dated 04-06-2022 continue to cause irreparable harm to the petitioner Bank’s reputation and interests.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The plaintiff uses the mark ‘JANGEER’, whereas the mark of the defendant includes an ‘I’ in place of ‘EE’ and ‘D’ in place of ‘R’ i.e., ‘JANGID’. Apart from the difference in the spellings of the marks of the plaintiff and the defendant, the manner and style of writing is also completely different. The added features in the defendant’s mark make it quite distinct from the plaintiff’s mark.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court observed that the involvement of the complainant remains a matter of judicial discretion rather than an enforceable entitlement, and the fundamental principle of juvenile justice i.e., ‘rehabilitation over retribution’ must remain paramount in any such determination.

Continue reading
Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Every action that might be disliked by a class of people may not necessarily lead to the outraging of religious sentiments because an act without the intention to outrage religious feelings would not be covered under Section 295A.”

Continue reading