Copyright registration is not mandatory under the Copyright Act, 1957: Bombay High Court
While hearing an interim application to a suit for trade mark and copyright infringement, the Bombay High Court held that Copyright registration
Extreme or harsh opinion is not a hate speech: Bombay High Court
While quashing an FIR, the Bombay High Court held that merely because the point of view of the Petitioner is extreme or harsh will not make it a ha
The Petitioner should first exhaust all his remedy before invoking Article 226 , when the matter is not of public importance: Patna High Court.
This case was filled by Kumari Sonam Madheshiya W/o Durgesh Kumar Gupta Resident of VillageSelar Khurd Ward No. -2, Gram Panchayat and P.O.- Paikau
The Patna High Court ordered the concerned respondent to undertake process of selection and appointment to the post of Sevika/Sahayika of Anganbari Centre in accordance with law.
This case was filled by Mamta Kumari Wife of Awadh Kumar Resident of Village- Loharganwa, Ward No.08, P.S.- Keshariya, District- East Champaran aga
If dispute arises in relation to the management and affairs of the Union formed and registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926 must be dealt by appropriate authority under the Act and not through PIL.
This case was filled by RajKishore Kumar, son of Nageshwar Prasad Yadav, resident of Mohalla Lal Darwaza, Town Munger, Dist
THE COURT CAN NEITHER BE A MUTE SPECTATOR TO THE WHIMS AND FANCIES OF THE INVESTIGATING AGENCY NOR BE A PARTY TO IT- HIGH COURT OF ODISHA
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Odisha through the division bench of Justice Sashikant Mishra in the case of Binod Bihari S
COURT OF EQUITY EXERCISING JURISDICTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 WILL HAVE TO BE MINDFUL OF THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND ENSURE THAT IN RIGIDLY APPLYING TECHNICAL RULES OF PROCEDURE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE DOES NOT RESULT: ODISHA HIGH COURT
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Odisha through the division bench of THE CHIEF JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK in the case of Rames
A LAWFUL RIGHT IS ALWAYS PROTECTED AND CANNOT BE TAKEN AWAY BY AN AMENDMENT BROUGHT INTO FORCE AT A LATER POINT OF TIME. HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT AN UNLAWFUL POSSESSION WHICH DOES NOT CONVEY ANY RIGHT CAN STILL BE DEFENDED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ACT TO BE PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE: ODISHA HIGH COURT
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Odisha through the division bench of Justice Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Ra
Bail granted to disabled mother accused of killing newborn: Kerala High Court
The High Court of Kerala, through learned judge, Justice Gopinath P in the case Nisha Suresh v. State of Kerala (BAIL APPL. NO. 274 OF 2022) grante
Retired Supreme Court judge was ordered to find out the authenticity of conversation, with regard to plot designed against Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh and senior sitting judges of Supreme Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court
This particular decision is upheld by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh through the learned Division Bench of JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY AND JU
