Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

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”.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Plaintiffs submitted that being the ex-franchisee, Defendant 1 was clearly aware of the ownership and notoriety of the ‘MOTI MAHAL’, ‘MOTI MAHAL DELUX TANDOORI TRAIL’, ‘TANDOORI TRAIL’ and their formative marks as well as the goodwill and reputation enjoyed by the plaintiffs related to the said trade marks.

Continue reading
Kerala High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“A prosecution witness, who was examined already, cannot be recalled by exercising the powers under Section 233 CrPC. However, such an exercise can be done under Section 311 CrPC at any stage, including that of Section 233, provided all the requirements and parameters of Section 311 are otherwise satisfied.”

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

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.

Continue reading