Introduction The Right to Information Act, 2005, aims to promote transparency while balancing the duties of public servants. In a…

Delhi High Court Clarifies Scope Of Regional Director’s Power Under Section 16 Of Companies Act In Trademark Name Disputes In…

Introduction The judgement delivered by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Firoz A Nadiadwala vs Seven Arts International…

Indiamart Inter Mesh Limited Vs OpenAI Inc. and Ors.: Calcutta High Court’s Landmark AI Governance Judgment The decision delivered by…

Introduction In this judgment concerning patent opposition proceedings in the agrochemical sector, the Delhi High Court has underscored the importance…

Introduction The decision of the High Court of Karnataka in Mr Santosh Kumar R.S. vs Mr Aditya Dhar is an…

Introduction The judgment delivered by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Bharat Bhogilal Patel v. TVS Electronics Ltd.…

The Delhi High Court in Baldev Singh v. Godran Rubber Plastic Industries, 1999 SCC OnLine Del 329, held that although amendments of pleadings should generally be liberally allowed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, courts cannot permit amendments that introduce a completely inconsistent case or seek to withdraw clear admissions previously made in pleadings and related proceedings. The Court observed that judicial admissions carry substantial value and can only be withdrawn upon satisfactory explanation of inadvertent mistake. Since the plaintiff sought to alter the foundation of the suit by introducing a contradictory plea of prior user after previously denying such use, the amendment application was dismissed with costs.

Moral Rights Under Copyright Act, 1957 Introduction Moral rights are not directly mentioned in the Copyright Act, 1957. But the…

Introduction 1.1 Background and Context Copyright law has historically evolved as a mechanism to protect creative expression while simultaneously promoting…