- Asia
- Automobile
- Bangladesh
- Banking
- Biological Inventions
- bLAWgathon
- Brand Valuation
- Business
- Company Act
- Company Law
- Competition Law
- Constitutional Law
- Consumer Law
- Copyright
- Copyright Infringement
- Copyright Litigation
- Corporate Law
- Counterfeiting
- Covid
- Design
- Digital Media
- Digital Right Management
- Educational Conferences/ Seminar
- Fashion Law
- FERs
- Foreign Law
- Gaming Industry
- GDPR
- GIg Economy
- Hi Tech Patent Commercialisation
- Hi Tech Patent Litigation
- IBC
- India
- Indonesia
- Intellectual Property
- Intellectual Property Protection
- IP Commercialization
- IP Licensing
- IP Litigation
- IP Practice in India
- IPAB
- IPAB Decisions
- Khadi Industries
- labour Law
- Legal Issues
- Licensing
- Live-in relationships
- Lok Sabha Bill
- Media & Entertainment Law
- Member of Parliament
- Myanmar
- NCLT
- NEPAL
- News & Updates
- Online Gaming
- Patent Act
- Patent Commercialisation
- Patent Fess
- Patent Filing
- patent infringement
- Patent Licensing
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Marketing
- Patent Opposition
- Patent Rule Amendment
- Patents
- pharma
- Pharma- biotech- Patent Commercialisation
- Pharma/Biotech Patent Litigations
- Pollution
- Protection of SMEs
- Section 3(D)
- Signapore
- Social Media
- Sports Law
- Stamp Duty
- Stock Exchange
- TAX
- Technology
- Telecom Law
- Telecommunications
- Thailand
- Trademark
- Trademark Infringement
- Trademark Litigation
- UAE
- Uncategorized
- USPTO
- Vietnam
Jan Vishwas Bill: Description & Analysis
Brief Introduction The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), on the advice of industry organisations and significant stakeholders, has proposed the Bill. The 108-page Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill, 2022 as it was presented to the Lok Sabha, calls for amending 183 clauses found in 42 Acts that are controlled by … Continue reading Jan Vishwas Bill: Description & Analysis
Read more »Case Analysis: Ganesh ginning & pressing Co. Ltd. V. State of Maharashtra 2005 (4) Mh.L.J. 263 AIR 2005 Bombay 324.
Introduction and Facts of the case The petitioner in this case was a company engaged in the business of Ginning and Pressing since 1938. The company owned a land in its name bearing Survey No. 225, situated at Jalna. The portion of land was in industrial zone earlier however, the Municipal Council at Jalna subsequently … Continue reading Case Analysis: Ganesh ginning & pressing Co. Ltd. V. State of Maharashtra 2005 (4) Mh.L.J. 263 AIR 2005 Bombay 324.
Read more »Vicarious Liability under Current Legal Regime of Negotiable Instruments Act: An Analysis of Evolving Judicial Precedents
Introduction Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 (“NI Act”) makes it a crime to dishonour a cheque. The purpose of the provision, according to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, is to promote the efficacy of banking operations and to ensure credibility in conducting business via cheques. Because companies conduct a large number of … Continue reading Vicarious Liability under Current Legal Regime of Negotiable Instruments Act: An Analysis of Evolving Judicial Precedents
Read more »Capital Food Private Limited vs. Radiant Indus Chem Pvt. Ltd.
Introduction In addition to producing and marketing a wide range of dips, spreads, condiments, sauces, noodles, soups, pastes, dressings, ready-to-eat food products, and other food preparations, the plaintiff was one of India’s top food manufacturers. It was also the first to independently create the distinctive trade mark “SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY” for dips and spreads. The defendant … Continue reading Capital Food Private Limited vs. Radiant Indus Chem Pvt. Ltd.
Read more »Delhi Hc’s Subway Judgement: When Is A Trademark Not Seen ‘As Whole’?- Part I
Introduction Recently a single bench of the Delhi HC gave an order in Subway IP LLC v. Infinity Foods & Ors.[1] (‘Subway’) using the rule of Anti-Dissection. In this case, although the single bench acknowledged the rule of Anti-Dissection but took a calculated detour to appreciate a dominant element of the two competing marks to … Continue reading Delhi Hc’s Subway Judgement: When Is A Trademark Not Seen ‘As Whole’?- Part I
Read more »Case analysis: ISKCON v. ISKCON Apparel Pvt. Ltd.
Introduction According to Investopedia a trademark is any name, sign, design, logo, or symbol that serves to distinguish the goods of one business from those of another[i]. However, Section 2(1)(zb) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, defines ‘trademark’ as a mark which is capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing the goods or … Continue reading Case analysis: ISKCON v. ISKCON Apparel Pvt. Ltd.
Read more »An Analysis On Recent Developments Of Piercing Of Corporate Veil Vis-a-Vis Digital Radio (Mumbai) Broadcasting Ltd V Union Of India.
Introduction The present case stems from two similar writ petitions filed by Digital Radio (Mumbai) Company and Digital radio (Delhi) Company (hereinafter, “Mumbai and Delhi company”), both in the business of running entertainment channel cum broadcasting songs. Both the companies are running Red FM 93.5 channels for Mumbai and Delhi, respectively, under the Phase-II licensing … Continue reading An Analysis On Recent Developments Of Piercing Of Corporate Veil Vis-a-Vis Digital Radio (Mumbai) Broadcasting Ltd V Union Of India.
Read more »An Uncharted Territory: The Possibility Of Betting In Esports And Its Legal Ramifications
Introduction Esports have become increasingly popular in recent years not just in India but throughout the world. Esports have become quite popular, particularly among young people. Esports are widely available, and their popularity will only grow in the future. Esports are a recent and popular trend among people worldwide. Esports and sports are fundamentally different … Continue reading An Uncharted Territory: The Possibility Of Betting In Esports And Its Legal Ramifications
Read more »Samir Kasal V. Prashant Mehta & Ors: Decrypting The Conundrum Conflux Of Copyright And Confidentiality Over Cricket
Introduction The multifaceted pursuit of undue capitalistic gains has for decades posed a colossal threat to intellectual autonomy, the daunting effects of which ruthlessly trickled down to the burgeoning infringement of innovation in the past. In furtherance of such interest, the absence of a definite judicial advertence that paralleled immunity against such allied transgressional oversights … Continue reading Samir Kasal V. Prashant Mehta & Ors: Decrypting The Conundrum Conflux Of Copyright And Confidentiality Over Cricket
Read more »Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries vs. DWD Pharmaceuticals
Introduction The trade mark “FORZEST” was created and adopted by the plaintiff’s predecessor-in-interest, “Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd.” in 2003. It was registered in Class 5 for “pharmaceutical and medicinal preparations for human and veterinary use.” The Trade Mark Registry identified the plaintiff as the later owner of the aforementioned trademark. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant’s … Continue reading Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries vs. DWD Pharmaceuticals
Read more »