High Court
Delhi High Court Quashes 'NAUKRIYAN' Trademark, Says It Is Deceptively Similar To Naukri.com
The Delhi High Court has recently quashed the trademark registration of "NAUKRIYAN," finding it deceptively similar to the “NAUKRI” mark used by Info Edge (India) Limited for its flagship job portal, Naukri.com. In a judgment delivered on March 10, 2026, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said the dominant and essential feature in both marks is the word "naukri." According to the court, “naukriyan” is simply the plural form of the Hindi word “naukri”, meaning job, and that this variation does not create...
Kerala High Court Sets Aside Rent Control Appellate Authority Order For Proceeding During IBC Moratorium
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday set aside an order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority after finding that an appeal against a corporate debtor had been taken up despite a moratorium being in force under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. A bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. observed, “Under Section 14(1), it is clearly stated that once a moratorium is declared, there cannot be an institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the...
Fundamental Evidence Principles Cannot Be Ignored In Arbitration: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on 9 March held that while arbitral proceedings are not strictly bound by the technical provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, the fundamental principles governing the burden of proof and the admissibility of evidence cannot be ignored to uphold an arbitral award that is patently illegal. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad was hearing an appeal filed by Arenel (Private) Ltd challenging a judgment dated 8 September...
Delhi High Court Restores Arbitral Award In Warehouse Fire Case Involving CWC–Indo Arya Logistics
The Delhi High Court on 10 March restored an arbitral award of Rs. 91,62,992 in a warehouse fire dispute between Central Warehousing Corporation and Indo Arya Logistics, holding that the Commercial Court had exceeded its limited powers by substituting its own view on negligence. A Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora observed that the arbitrator's inference (that Indo Arya Logistics was negligent) was a plausible view arising from the circumstances of...
Third Parties Can Challenge Arbitral Interim Orders Affecting Their Rights: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on 5 March held that third parties whose rights are directly affected by arbitral proceedings can challenge interim orders as veritable parties under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, even if they are not signatories to the arbitration agreement. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan made the observation while hearing petitions by flat purchasers and legal heirs of Mohammed Ali M. Sali in a dispute over a 2009 Joint Development Agreement with Rajaram Chavan Real Estate Pvt....
Madras High Court Directs Commercial Court To Number, Hear Suit Returned For Skipping Pre-Institution Mediation
The Madras High Court has recently directed a Commercial Court in Chennai to number a commercial suit that had been returned before numbering for failure to undergo pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Court held that the plaint disclosed a case seeking “urgent interim relief." Justice S. Sounthar observed that at the stage of numbering a plaint, the court's inquiry is limited to examining whether the suit plausibly seeks urgent interim relief....
Dispute With Composite Cause Of Action Against Multiple Parties Not Arbitrable: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court on 6 March refused to refer a commercial dispute between Tirupati Vancom Pvt. Ltd. and others to arbitration, as the suit involved several defendants. Justice Aniruddha Roy dismissed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, observing that where the cause of action and reliefs are inseparably connected, a dispute cannot be split and referred to arbitration even if an arbitration clause exists between some of the parties. He...
AO Cannot Reopen Assessment On Same Material To Cure Lapse In Original Proceedings: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court on 24 February ruled that the Revenue cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on the same material that was already scrutinised in the original proceedings, which later lapsed due to the Assessing Officer's failure to meet the statutory deadlines. The Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that reopening an assessment in such circumstances is an impermissible attempt to “camouflage”...
Establishment Of Kolhapur Bench No Ground To Say Mumbai Seat Lost Jurisdiction Over Writ Against DRAT Order: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has recently ruled that the creation of the Kolhapur Circuit Bench does not divest the Principal Seat at Mumbai of jurisdiction over a writ petition challenging an order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, even where the dispute originates in Kolhapur district. A Division Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram V. Shirsat made the observation while hearing a writ petition challenging a September 19, 2024 order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) in...
Subsequent Use By Junior Applicant Cannot Defeat Earlier 'Proposed to Be Used' Trademark Application: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Parle Products Pvt Ltd in a trademark dispute over the mark “20-20”. The court held that when competing trademark applications are filed on a “proposed to be used” basis, subsequent commercial use by one applicant cannot defeat the earlier filing date of the other. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela upheld an order of the Registrar of Trade Marks dated April 29, 2025 rejecting Parle's opposition to a rival company's application to register the mark...
Delhi High Court Directs Removal Of 'Shree Sakshat' Copyright Registration For Copying Heineken's Tiger Beer Logo
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday directed the Registrar of Copyrights to remove from the Register a copyright registration obtained by Vijay Keshav Wagh for the artistic work titled “SHREE SAKSHAT,” holding that it copied in its entirety the TIGER beer logo owned by Heineken Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that a comparison of the two logos showed that Wagh had reproduced Heineken's tiger device in its entirety, with only minor additions that did not alter the dominant...