Issue for Consideration Can a trademark infringement suit be referred to arbitration if the defendant questions its maintainability on the ground of existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties and seeks a reference under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Act, 1996 – s.8 – Not all trademark disputes are non-arbitrable; those concerning contractual rights can be arbitrated – Petitioners filed a commercial suit against Respondents seeking permanent injunction in relation to trademark “SRI ANGANNAN BIRIYANI HOTEL/ABM
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the purchase tax, as imposed by s.5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 or s.7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, is a tax in the nature of manufacture or consignment tax or an inter-state levy, and thus, ultra vires the legislative powers of the state legislature; whether the purchase of goods by the appellants from dealers exempted from payment of tax by virtue of notifications or exemptions issued under the Kerala Act or Tamil Nadu Act is a purchase “which is liable to tax” within the
Issue for Consideration Whether the judgment of NGT quashing e-auction notice issued by the appellant-State Government for sand mining and the consequent grant of Letters of Interest in favour of successful bidders on the ground that the auction was conducted in the absence of a valid, final and Survey Report (DSR), ought to be upheld; whether a draft DSR can be the basis for a recommendation by the District Level Expert Appraisal Committee and for the District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority for B2 category projects pertaining to mining of minor minerals lease area less
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred by not quashing the prosecution against the accused under ss.186 and 353 of Indian Penal Code. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.186 – Whether the Chargesheet discloses the ingredients of offence was conducted by the labour officers on the tip of social workers(appellants) to verify the allegation that bonded/child labour were employed at the brick kiln, the appellant accompanied the labour officers for the raid – During inspection, a difference of opinion cropped up between the
Issue for Consideration Whether Trial Court ought to have given proper time and opportunity to the legal aid defence counsel to prepare the matter and should have deferred the cross-examination of PW-1 by a reasonable time so as to ensure fairness in the proceedings. Headnotes† Bharatiya ss.408, 432 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.367, 391 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 201, 376(2)(i), 376AB – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – ss.5, 6 – Accused- appellant charged for subjecting his step-daughter to sexual
Issue for Consideration (i) Whether the additional condonable period of 15 days as provided under section 61(2) IBC commences from the end of the prescribed limitation period of 30 days, in case the prescribed limitation period for filing the appeal falls on a day when the court is closed or (ii) What is the meaning of the term ‘prescribed period’ as defined under Section 2(j) read with Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and Rule 3 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016? (iii) Whether the NCLAT has the power to condone the delay beyond the said prescribed and condonable
Issue for Consideration Whether an accused from whom or from whose premises the records, instruments or documents of title of the property are seized along with the property u/ss.17 and 18 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) is entitled to get copies to get copies of the documents relied upon in the complaint u/s.44(1)(b) of the PMLA and the documents produced along with the complaint; right of an accused to seek production of the documents not relied upon by the prosecution -at what stage the accused can demand copies of the documents
1854 : 2025 INSC 643 P. Nallammal v. State By The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Police, Dindigul, Tamil Nadu (Criminal Appeal No. 2489 of 2025) With (Criminal Appeal No. 2490 of 2025) Tmt. P. Nallammal & Ors. A1: Tmt. P. Nallammal A2: Thiru A. M. Paramasivam (Died) Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to appeal challenging the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s.109 IPC r/w ss.13(1)(e) and 13(2) of PC
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court erred in awarding differing compensation amounts for lands acquired in two villages-Kukrola and Fazalwas; and whether the quantum of compensation awarded is appropriate for both these villages; and if not, on what basis should the market Act, 1894 – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Distinctive compensation amounts awarded to landowners from villages Kukrola and Fazalwas – Correctness: Held: Adjacent lands or villages possessing
Issue for Consideration 1. Whether an unregistered sale agreement can confer valid title or ownership of immovable property. 2. Whether a High Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 can direct dispossession of a party without proof of actual and – Section 17 & Section 49 – Immovable property can be legally and lawfully transferred/conveyed only by a registered deed of conveyance: Held: By referring to Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana & Anr (2012) 1 SCC 656, it was held that the transactions
Issue for Consideration Appellants issued work order to 1st respondent for construction of flats and paid advance. Bank guarantee equivalent to the advance money was furnished by 1st respondent to secure the amount. When the work got delayed and disputes arose between the requested refund of debit balance, failing which the bank guarantee was to be encashed. The 1st respondent filed petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before the Commercial Court, along with applications under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Order XXXIX Rule 3
Issue for Consideration Whether in case of discharge of a serviceman from the Indian Army, on the ground of medical invalidation and consequent denial of disability pension, the burden of proof lies on the serviceman or the concerned department? Whether the existence of a causal link between the disability in order to claim disability pension or the nature of the service area? Whether a non-reasoned order of the Medical board be relied upon to grant or deny of disability pension? Headnotes† Petitioner, after serving in Indian Army as a sepoy for 9 years, was discharged on ground
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for causing rape and murder of a child aged 3 years and 9 months. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 363, 376(2), 201 of a child – Prosecution case that gruesome rape and murder of a child at the tender age of 3 years and 9 months – Dead body of child recovered from pond located at a distance of one kilometer from appellant’s house – Prosecution case based on circumstantial evidence-last
Issue for Consideration Consortium of National Law Universities-respondent no.1 has been framing questions for the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT); In an examination, several questions and/or the answers were found to be not suitable; The High Court had passed an order with regard Headnotes† Education – Law Education – Common Law Admission Test – Framing of questions – Six questions in dispute – Each question dealt with individually – Respondent no.1 directed to amend the answer key, revise the marksheet and re-publish/ notify
Issue for Consideration Whether a dispute raised by an insured after giving a full and final discharge voucher to the insurer can be referred to arbitration. Headnotes† Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – s.11 – Appellant claimed loss and damages under the insurance – After a considerable delay, a grossly inadequate amount was offered by the respondent – Due to financial strain, appellant signed the undated and standardized voucher/advance receipt – Pursuant thereto, appellant received the cheque issued by the respondent –
Issue for Consideration The crux of the dispute is the ‘per square foot rate’ at which the mesne profit is to be calculated in connection with Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd.’s (HOCL) occupation, as ‘tenant’. The High Court held that application of uniform rate of the rate of interest payable at 8% p.a. would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Headnotes† Mesne Profit – Calculation of – The tenant originally entered into the demised premises and 2nd floor thereof, totalling 7825 Sq.ft built-up area, as a
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of the First Appellate Court acquitting the appellant-accused and setting aside his conviction u/s.138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 as recorded by the trial Court. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 2001 – Applicability of – First Appellate Court allowed the appellant’s appeal against conviction – It was held that as the respondent-complainant was indulged in money lending activities without acquiring a license, thus, he was acting in breach of the
Issue for Consideration Whether the Appellant belongs to the Hindu Parayan caste in the State of Kerala and is covered by the 1950 Order insofar as it relates to the State of Kerala; whether the Appellant had still retained the Hindu Parayan caste, as a member of the Hindu religion, when he Constituency for Legislative Assembly of Kerala. Headnotes† Representation of the People Act, 1951 – s.116-A and s.100(1)(a) and (d)(i) – Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 – Part VIII of the Schedule – Validity of election – Appellant filed his
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court dismissing the application of the appellants seeking quashing of the complaint, and that too without issuing notice to respondents. Headnotes† Notices/Processes – Non-issuance of, by Violation of natural justice – Criminal application by the appellants seeking quashing of complaint filed against them – High Court dismissed the application, and was not even inclined to issue notice to the respondents – Correctness: Held: If the Division Bench of the High
Issue for Consideration Whether the Special Court while dealing with an application under sub-section 2 of s.44 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 made in respect of a large number of witnesses, recorded the satifaction which is required to be recorded in terms of sub-section 2 of s.44 by sub-section 2 of s.44 of UAPA was recorded qua an individual witness. Headnotes† Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sub-section 2 of s.44 – National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – s.17 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.173(6) –