Balance of convenience

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Delhi High Court observed that merely because there was no express provision in the Code of Civil Procedure, it does not mean that in-camera proceedings cannot be allowed. Therefore, the Court held that in appropriate cases, the Court may under Section 151 of the Code pass any order for carrying out the proceedings in camera if warranted by the facts and circumstances of the case.

Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court granted interim relief to Viacom 18, as it has made out a prima facie case on merits and the balance of convenience was also in its favour.

Allahabad High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Fraud, as an exception to the rule of non-interference with encashment of bank guarantees, is not any fraud, but a fraud of an egregious nature, going to the root i.e., to the foundation of the bank guarantee and an established fraud. The entire case of the respondent fails to qualify for this.

Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Madras High Court: In an application filed by Viacom 18 praying for restraining several cable and internet service providers involved

Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Delhi High Court: In a suit filed for injunction by the Plaintiff restraining the Defendant from selling, offering for sale,

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi (‘plaintiff’) seeking relief of permanent injunction and

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Delhi High Court: In a case filed by producers’ (‘plaintiff') of the film ‘Brahmastra Part One: Shiva' seeking permanent injunction

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Mini Pushkarna, J. granted ad interim injunction against Pawan Khera and others (‘defendants’) who allegedly organized a Press Conference

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J. denied relief sought by ‘TV Today Network’ ‘plaintiff ‘on allegations of copyright infringement, defamation and commercial

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Nitin Jamdar and C.V Bhadang, JJ., upheld the order of the District Court refusing to

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Meghalaya High Court: H. S. Thangkhiew, J., dismissed a petition which was filed aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court by

Himachal Pradesh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Himachal Pradesh High Court: Vivek Singh Thakur, J. rejected bail and dismissed the petition. The facts of the case are that, the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: A Division Bench of I.P. Mukerji and Md. Nizamuddin, JJ., allowed an appeal filed against the order of the Single

Uttarakhand High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: A writ petition was entertained by Manoj K. Tiwari, J. where the petitioner was aggrieved by the order passed

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rajasthan High Court: Sabina, J. dismissed the appeal on the ground that party will suffer an irreparable loss if the application was

Uttarakhand High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: Lok Pal Singh, J. allowed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for quashing the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bombay High Court: In a very important case relating to rights of an owner of the copyright in sound recordings, S.J. Kathawalla, J. issued

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J. allowed an application for arrest of marine vessel filed

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Calcutta High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, decided an admiralty suit wherein it directed the arrest of