662 results found

The Supreme Court has held that a judgment passed by a Single Judge who was designated as a Commercial Court cannot be treated as a nullity or as one passed without jurisdiction merely because the petition...

Recovery statutes and general civil jurisdiction continues to generate significant judicial debate, particularly in the context of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets...

The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 was enacted with the intent to improve efficiency and reduce delay in deciding commercial cases.

The direction dated June 09, 2020, was in lieu of the order passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice D.N. Patel dated June 03, 2020.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rakesh Kumar Verma v. HDFC Bank Ltd. and HDFC Bank Ltd. v. Deepti Bhatia, Civil Appeal Nos. 2282 and 2286 of 2025, has held that exclusive jurisdiction clauses in private employment contracts are enforceable, and civil suits instituted in courts other than those agreed upon are not maintainable.

In a significant ruling delivered on May 29, 2026, the Supreme Court of India in Chaturbhuj Pradhan v. Amar Pradhan & Anr. (2026 INSC 600) dismissed an appeal challenging a direction to undergo DNA...

Matrimonial litigation between highly qualified professional spouses throws up questions that courts are increasingly called upon to answer: when both parties hold advanced degrees...

Linguistic vibrance and colloquial jargons are colourful add-ons to the cultural flora of a region. But where technical aspects such as registration of trademarks are concerned, vernaculars often tend to inculcate deceptiveness amongst the brands.

The fundamental object of the Section 57 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 is to maintain the purity of the Register and to attain that goal, the Act allow any person aggrieved, by way of an application, to cause the Registrar or Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), as the case may be, to cancel, vary or rectify the entry wrongly made or remaining on the Register.

The Trademark law provides that a mark shall not be registered if it is identical with or similar to the earlier trademark even though it is to be registered for goods or services, which are not similar to those for which the earlier mark is registered, if this earlier trademark is a well known mark and the registration of the mark would be detrimental to the reputation of this well known mark.

India's Supreme Court has delivered a landmark ruling addressing the dangerous phenomenon of AI-generated fabricated case law in legal proceedings. The judgment establishes a zero-tolerance policy for reliance on unverified AI-generated legal information, holding that even minimal use of hallucinated precedents constitutes a fundamental subversion of the rule of law.

The High Court of Kerala recently delivered a significant judgment in the case of Uvais Muhammad K.C. & Another v. State of Kerala & Others.

The Court held that the scope of the Section 9 and Section 11 of the Act is different. Section 9 of the Act safeguards party's interests to prevent frustration of arbitral proceedings while Section 11...

Subsequently, tender was floated by NHAI for the balance work and bids were invited in public domain.

In India, Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("A&C Act"), addresses the appointment of arbitrators when parties cannot agree on a choice or mechanism for their selection.

The High Court of Delhi on October 26, 2021 released the Video Conferencing Rules namely the "High Court of Delhi Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2021".

Arbitration has long been regarded as an efficient and party-centric mechanism for dispute resolution. However, the flexibility granted to arbitral tribunals is not without limits.