Judgment Analysis

Facts of the case: This case of Arup Rabha v. The State of Assam & another, was filed by the appellant assailing the judgement and order dated 03.12.2018 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Goalpara in Sessions Case No.25/2016 convicting the sole appellant (Arup Rabha) for committing offences under Sections 364(A)/302/201 of The Indian […]

Issues –1. Infringement of Registered Trademark and Copyright – RPG.2. Whether there has been an infringement of the trademark of the plaintiff by the defendants under Section 29(4) of the Act?3. Do the defendants’ use of the trade mark and/or trade name containing ‘RPG’ as its only leading, essential and prominent feature in respect of their services

Issue –1. Dispute regarding ownership of immovable and movable properties between two real brothers.2. Is it compulsory for the Courts to strictly adhere to Order XXVI – Rule 13 and 14 of Civil Procedure Code?3. Is it mandatory that shares of the property shall be separated by metes and bounds? RuleAt the outset, Order XXVI

Criminal Appeal No. 730 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 9503 of 2018 The Appellant filed this criminal appeal in response to the High Court’s contested decision on an application for interim maintenance made in a petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the Appellant’s wife and minor son in

Issue –1. Petitioner is the wife of one Mr. Fazal Khan who is severely sick and has been living in a vegetative state since a decade. Can the Petitioner be appointed as the guardian of Fazal’s personal and property?2. Does the Son hold any right, title or settled and enforceable share in his parent’s flats

Issue1. Whether the applicants are require to adhere to the Motor Vehicle Guidelines, 2020 if they have filed objections.2. Whether the applicants applying for a license are adhering to the Motor Vehicle Guidelines, 2020 issued by the Central Government.3. Whether the aggregators are conforming with the Motor Vehicle Guidelines. RuleThe aggregators are required to comply with

ISSUEThere are two main concerns:1. Whether the IPR suits that are valued below Rs.3 lakhs can be listed before the District Judges who are not notified as Commercial Courts?2. If yes, will the provisions of CCA would be applicable to such disputes?RULE1. Jurisdiction of the Commercial Court is discussed in detail in the case of

IssueThe petitioner is a headmaster who was initially accused of violating Sections 324 of the IPC and 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act of 2015. The petitioner was absolved of the offense under S. 324 of the IPC according to the sessions court’s order dated 10/8/2021. However, in the same order, the Ld. Judge further

Suit filed by Phonepe Private Limited on Trademark Infringement by Mobilepe Fintech Private Limited ISSUE1. Whether Trademark Act, 2017 is operating or not, when the Fourth Schedule to Trademark Rules, 2002 has been omitted, is the question before the Hon’ble Court.2. Further, one more question arose before the Hon’ble Court was regarding the publication of class-wise