High Court
Delhi High Court Sets Aside ₹5.19 crore Award Against Railways Board After Serving Officer Appointed As Arbitrator
The Delhi High Court has set aside a ₹5.19 crore arbitral award against the Railways Board after the Railways challenged the legality of the sole arbitrator it had appointed. The Court held that appointing a serving railway officer as arbitrator, without an express written waiver by both parties, rendered the award void from the beginning.Allowing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Justice Avneesh Jhingan held, “The appointment of a serving employee as an...
No Monopoly Over Word 'Forest' Unless It Has Secondary Meaning: Delhi High Court Refuses To Halt Baby Forest
Holding there can be no monopoly over the word “FOREST” without stringent proof that it has acquired a secondary meaning, the Delhi High Court has refused to grant an interim injunction in favour of the luxury Ayurvedic brand Forest Essentials, allowing a newer entrant, Baby Forest, to continue using 'BABY FOREST' and 'BABY FOREST-SOHAM OF AYUVEDA' marks. In a judgment pronounced on February 27, 2026, a Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain upheld the Single...
Delhi High Court Confirms Arbitral Award Favoring Rama Constructions In Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Dispute
The Delhi High Court on 25 February, upheld an arbitral award granting Rs. 80.05 lakh along with 10% interest to Rama Constructions Company in a dispute arising from civil and electrical works executed at the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Complex, New Delhi. Dismissing the Union of India's challenge, Justice Jasmeet Singh reiterated the limited scope of judicial interference, noting that the Arbitrator's findings were evidence-based and did not warrant interference under Section 34 of the...
Madras High Court Approves Settlement Favouring SNS Movies In 'Think Studio' Trademark Dispute
The Madras High Court on 23 February decreed a trademark infringement suit in favour of SNS Movies Productions LLP, owner of Think Studios, after Manjunath, the proprietor of a rival firm, named Think Studio, undertook to permanently cease using the contested mark. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy recorded a settlement in which the defendant agreed to withdraw its pending trademark application and remove the infringing name from all digital and physical platforms by 10 April 2026. He noted: ...
S.108 Customs Act | Statements Recorded By Customs Officers Sufficient To Proceed To Trial: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has refused to discharge one of the accused in a CBI corruption case, holding that in the present case, statements recorded by Customs officers under Section 108 of the Customs Act, along with other materials constitute sufficient prima facie grounds to proceed to trial. “Thus, in the instant case, prima facie, there are materials to proceed with trial of the revision petitioner/accused No.3. No doubt, the evidentiary value of approvers and how far the same to be believed...
Delhi High Court Appoints Arbitrator In ₹91 Lakh Benetton–Gini and Jony Payment Dispute
The Delhi High Court has appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate a Rs. 91,21,454 dispute between global fashion brand Benetton India Pvt Ltd and children's apparel company Gini and Jony Ltd arising out of unpaid dues under a 2014 Distribution Agreement. The Court held that whether subsequent settlement agreements superseded the original contract and extinguished the arbitration clause must be decided by the arbitral tribunal and not at the stage of appointment. Justice Jasmeet Singh ruled...
Gujarat High Court Quashes Reassessment On Income From Property Sale After Fraudulent Deeds Cancelled
The Gujarat High Court has recently quashed reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act agaisnt an individual taxpayer after noting that the Assessing Officer failed to consider that two sale deeds had been cancelled on account of fraud and that the sale consideration had been reversed. Section 148A governs the procedure to be followed before reopening an assessment. A bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi recorded that the sale deeds dated...
Kerala High Court Restrains Former G-TEC Franchisee From Using GIO TECH Mark
Holding that “G-TEC” and “GIO TECH” are phonetically similar and confusion is likely to be caused, the Kerala High Court has restrained a former franchisee from using the marks “GIO TECH” and “GIO TECH COMPUTER ACADEMY,” setting aside a trial court order that had refused interim relief. Justice S. Manu, in a judgment delivered on February 18, 2026, held that the analysis made by the court below was “by dissecting the trademarks” and that such an exercise “is not in consonance with the settled...
Purva Dhanashree Moves Delhi High Court Amid Trademark Dispute Over 'Vilasini Natyam'
Renowned classical dancer Purva Dhanashree has approached the Delhi High Court seeking permission to continue using the name 'Vilasini Natyam' for her public performances, challenging the exclusive trademark claimed by her guru, Swapnasundari, a Padma Shri awardee, over the traditional dance form. On Thursday 26 February, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela urged the “guru-shishya” duo to resolve the matter through dialogue, noting that while the trademark is registered, the guru's own research indicates...
Income Tax Act | Ten-Year Block Under Section 153A Includes Search Year: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court on 23 February held that tax authorities must include the search year when computing the ten-year block for reopening assessments under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A Bench comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi quashed a notice issued in 2025 for Assessment Year 2014-2015, as it fell outside the ten-year period, with the tenth year being Assessment Year 2015-16. The Court observed that to reopen proceedings under Section 153A, “the date...
Arbitrator Appointed By Agreed Institution Not Per Se Unilateral: Madras High Court
Drawing a clear distinction between unilateral appointments and institutional nominations, the Madras High Court has held that an arbitrator appointed by an arbitral institution agreed upon by the parties cannot automatically be treated as a unilateral appointee, even if one side initiates the process. “The appointment of Arbitral Tribunal by an institution that is agreed upon between the parties per se cannot be dealt with in the same manner in which the Court deals with an unilateral...
Extraordinary Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked In Factual Disputes: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court on 18 February, held that questions involving disputed facts, including the existence and relevance of incriminating material, cannot be examined in writ proceedings under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman, while dismissing a writ petition filed by Saroj Kumar Sahoo, emphasised that extraordinary writ jurisdiction is not available where an effective alternative remedy exists under the...












