+91 44 28120000

Call Us for an Appointment

[language-switcher]
logo
mobile logo
 

supreme court Tag

SURANA & SURANA > Posts tagged "supreme court"
29 September
0 Comments
Sticky

CASE COMMENT- ARN infrastructure India Limited vs Hara Prasad Ghosh: CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 31182/2023

Posted by Surana
in SSIA

T.G Niranjana - Associate, Dispute Resolution Practice Brief facts: A complaint under original jurisdiction was filed before the NCDRC seeking return of deposit from the Opposite Parties. In the said case, the Opposite Parties did not file their Written Version within the statutory timeline prescribed. While so, at the time of hearing final arguments, the Opposite Parties entered appearance through an advocate and sought an adjournment to make final arguments in the case. The NCDRC rejected the said request on the ground that the Written Version was not filed within the statutory period. The NCDRC allowed the complaint by hearing only the Complainant...

Continue reading
21 June
0 Comments
Sticky

SEVERING THE OLD FROM THE NEW: INDIA’S TRYST WITH SEVERABILITY AND CHALLENGES TO ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRAL AWARDS

Posted by Surana
in SSIA
SEVERING THE OLD FROM THE NEW - INDIA’S TRYST WITH SEVERABILITY

Ayushman Somani Student Intern, Dispute Resolution Practice Introduction Of the many principles that have been used to enforce arbitration awards in a more equitable manner in the last decade, few have proven to be as practical and effective as the ‘Doctrine of Severability’. This principal provides a middle-ground to an enforcing court by allowing it to only enforce that part of the award deemed to be free of certain encumbrances, thereby maintaining the sanctity of arbitration while ensuring an equitable award is enforced. Proposed originally as the ‘Doctrine of Blue Pencil’, the Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Co Ltd. (1) case decided...

Continue reading
09 June
0 Comments
Sticky

The defense of the accused may change after this Supreme Court Judgement

Posted by Surana
in Legal Buzz
Recently, the Supreme Court of India passed an important judgment that may change how the accused defend themselves in a trial. This revolves around Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1983. Normally, many accused individuals stick to standard defenses like "false case" or "I don't know" when they are questioned. But the problem is, these statements are often the only defense recorded by themselves in courts. This is where Section 313(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code comes into play. According to the new Supreme Court ruling (Premchand vs. The State of Maharashtra – 2023 LL (SC) 168 dated 03.03.2023), a detailed written statement by the accused under Section 313(5) must now be recorded and treated as an exhibit. This gives the accused a better chance to put forth their defense effectively. So, here's the takeaway: Even though it's optional, the accused should always provide a detailed statement under Section 313(5) when he or she is questioned by the court. It'll be marked as an exhibit and stay on the court record, even in case of an appeal. This could significantly help shape their defense

Recently, the Supreme Court of India passed an important judgment that may change how the accused defend themselves in a trial. This revolves around Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1983. Normally, many accused individuals stick to standard defenses like "false case" or "I don't know" when they are questioned. But the problem is, these statements are often the only defense recorded by themselves in courts. This is where Section 313(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code comes into play. According to the new Supreme Court ruling (Premchand vs. The State of Maharashtra – 2023 LL (SC) 168 dated 03.03.2023), a detailed...

Continue reading
19 September
0 Comments
Sticky

DOES THE STATE COMMISSION HAVE THE POWER TO SET ASIDE EX-PARTE ORDERS WHILE EXERCISING REVISIONAL JURISDICTION?

Posted by Surana
in SSIA
DOES THE STATE COMMISSION HAVE THE POWER TO SET ASIDE EX-PARTE ORDERS

T.G Niranjana, Associate, Dispute Prevention & Resolution It has been settled by a catena of judgments that the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commissions do not have the power to set aside the ex-parte orders passed by them. The current trend to ‘overcome this difficulty’ is to file a Revision Petition before the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commissions seeking to set aside the ex-parte orders passed by the District Commission. However, are such Revision Petitions maintainable in law? Power to set ex-parte: According to section 38(3)(b)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019,(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the District Commissions are empowered to...

Continue reading
09 July
0 Comments
Sticky

IP NEWS UPDATES -MAY 2022

Posted by Surana
in IPR News

USPTO To Begin Issuing Electronic Trademark Registration Certificates On 2nd May, the USPTO announced via federal notice that, on June 7, 2022, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will start issuing electronic certificates of trademark registration. The electronic registration certificate will serve as the official registration certificate once it is issued. Trademark owners will have the choice to obtain paper "presentation" copies when the USPTO starts distributing electronic registration certificates, although doing so will carry a price. The ability to purchase certified copies of their trademark registrations will also be available. The Supreme Court's Effort to Resolve the Date on Section...

Continue reading
08 October
0 Comments
Sticky

IP NEWS WEEKLY UPDATE – 7 OCT 2021

Posted by Surana
in IPR News
IPR News update template - 7 Oct

Piaggio v. Peugot Piaggio v. Peugot The Tribunal Judiciaire of Paris and Tribunale of Milan have found the control system which enables a three-wheeler to tilt like a regular two-wheeler employed by Peugeot Metropolis (Mahindra Group) to be infringing Piaggio Group’s patent and has banned Peugeot Motorcycles from producing, promoting, marketing, importing, exporting, using and/or possessing any three-wheeled scooter employing Piaggio’s patented technology in France. The court also imposed a fine of 1.5 million euros (Rs 12.95 crores) in addition to other penalties.AI cannot be an inventor AI cannot be an inventor Judgment dated 21 September 2021 ([2021] EWCA Civ 1374), the Court of Appeal has...

Continue reading
a
Ranked among the TOP Indian law firms and the “first choice” for legal assistance in South India, Surana & Surana International Attorneys has a sterling record of five decades in providing prompt, practical, cost effective and customized solutions with multi-disciplinary inputs. SSIA is widely acknowledged for setting industry benchmarks in expertise, responsiveness, client satisfaction and quality.

Facebook

LinkedIn

Youtube

Instagram

Pay Here

CORPORATE OFFICE

International Law Centre
61-63, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,
Chennai (formerly Madras) – 600 004. INDIA

Ph: +91-44-2812 0000,

Fax: +91-44-2812 0001

NCR

Suite #210, Paharpur Business Centre, 21, Nehru Place Greens, New Delhi – 110019

Ph: +91-11-41207494 / 7148,

Fax: +91-44-2812 0001

© Surana & Surana International Attorneys. All rights reserved.

Design & Build - Sense9Solutions