Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Purpose of examination is to screen out best candidates available for job and since petitioner obtained more than minimum required marks, he should have been considered for Stage-II under General Category as his rejection is not based on merit but only on account of document verification.”
“Whenever any information is requested by the Cyber Crime Cells of police authorities, banks ought to respond to the same in a diligent manner.”
“Several cases are filed in this Court every week in which it is alleged that Municipal Corporation of Delhi has taken no action despite several complaints having been submitted regarding a particular construction.”
“The infringement conducted by defendant by imitating plaintiff’s mark ‘WOODLAND’ and ‘tree device 
’ has been deliberate and calculated.”
“According to the plaintiff, the defendants’ activities pose a huge threat to human life owing to the defendants’ non-compliance with stringent quality check on the efficacy and safety of the products that has been maintained by the plaintiff.”
“The standard of proof in an inquiry in an extradition case is not of the same level as that required in a trial.”
“Defendants are directed to ensure that reference to the mark ‘BACHPAN’, either as a word mark or as a device mark, is removed from all physical and virtual sites on which the mark might be reflected in association with defendants.”
The suit was filed against the marks FERTISUN used per se as well as with the suffixes F and L as FERTISUN-F and FERTISUN-L and the corporate name of the defendant ‘LaurenSun Remedies Pvt Ltd’.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“There is no provision in the Unified Building Byelaws for Delhi, 2016 which proscribe charging of fees or controls the terms on which buildings are used.”
As per a status report dated 20-11-2023, the use of the mark ‘AAJ TAK’ has been disabled on all channels, and the domain names have been either suspended, locked or blocked.
“It is further pointed out that, without filing any response to the present plaint, Defendant 2 is continuing to mislead the public into believing that no license is required to be obtained from the plaintiff before exploiting the recordings in which it has copyright.”
The Court appreciated the incredible accomplishments of the athletes that represented India in the Special Olympics World Games, 2023 held in Berlin under the able and commendable guidance of SOB The athletes representing India finished their campaign with 200 medals.
Delhi High Court noted that after coming to know that the said document was manufactured, respondent 1 filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Delhi against Mr. Sanjay Aggarwal, Advocate.
“Only on the basis that the convict has committed a gruesome crime many years ago, it cannot be said that his temporary release on furlough would be against the interest of the society.”
Technology has posed a major challenge for entities like the Plaintiffs as there is a proliferation of many platforms including websites from where unauthorised, unlicensed and pirated content of the Plaintiffs can be downloaded, accessed and viewed by customers and viewers.
“The spouse having reasonable capacity of earning but chooses to remain unemployed without indicating sincere efforts to gain employment, should not be permitted to saddle other party with one sided responsibility of meeting out expenses.”
While freedom of speech and expression is sacrosanct, the reputation of a person earned over several decades, cannot be sacrificed at the altar of such freedom, when the impugned publication, ex-facie, contains unsubstantiated allegations and defamatory imputations, regardless of the truth.
The Petitioner is an Arjuna Awardee and is a Commonwealth and Asian Games medalist swimmer and was also appointed swimming team coach for the 2016 Rio Paralympic Games who was suspended from participating and being sponsored in any sports event organized by Paralympic Committee of India for three years.
“The hoarding incorporating the mural would reveal that it is clearly an advertisement and that defendant’s advertisement reproduced plaintiff’s mural titled ‘Humanity’.”