AI-curated court updates, legal developments, and practice-area insights for Indian legal professionals.
The Delhi High Court's appointment of an amicus curiae to represent Vivek Oberoi emphasizes procedural questions in civil suits related to the right of publicity, amidst concerns of adequate representation.
The Delhi High Court's appointment of an amicus curiae for Vivek Oberoi poses questions about the role of amicus and procedural integrity in civil suits.
The Bombay High Court clarifies the relationship between disobedience of court orders and the consequences that follow in KVIC v. Jaishukh N. Bhuta.
In KVIC v. Jaishukh N. Bhuta, the Bombay High Court ruled that not every willful breach of an interim injunction warrants punishment, emphasizing the distinction between disobedience and the consequences under Order XXXIX Rule 2A.
The Delhi High Court’s appointment of an amicus curiae for Vivek Oberoi in a civil suit underscores the complexities around the role of amicus curiae, especially when defendants withdraw from participation in their cases, raising critical procedural questions.
The Bombay High Court clarified in KVIC v. Jaishukh N. Bhuta that establishing disobedience of an interim injunction does not automatically lead to punishment. The ruling emphasizes that courts must focus on compliance mechanisms over retribution.
The Bombay High Court clarified in KVIC v. Jaishukh N. Bhuta that while a wilful breach of interim injunction exists, punishment is not an automatic consequence. This ruling reinvigorates the discussion on the purpose of injunctions and the nature of compliance.
The Delhi High Court's recent appointment of an amicus curiae in a civil suit involving Vivek Oberoi raises important questions regarding the role of amicus curiae in litigation, especially when counsel withdraws from representation.
The Delhi High Court appointed an amicus curiae to represent Vivek Oberoi’s interests after his counsel withdrew, raising questions about the role of amicus in civil suits pertaining to publicity rights.
The Delhi High Court appointed an amicus curiae to represent Vivek Oberoi after his counsel's withdrawal. This raises questions about the role of an amicus curiae and potential consequences for plaintiffs in civil suits.
The Supreme Court has referred the matter concerning pre-deposit conditions in arbitration agreements to the Chief Justice of India. The bench highlighted the potentially suppressive nature of high pre-deposit requirements on claims.
The Calcutta High Court has rebuked HDFC Bank regarding the blocking of TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee's account, questioning the timing and rationale behind the action, which occurred after a Supreme Court decision permitted his travel.
The Karnataka High Court affirmed the dismissal of a review petition under RERA, stating that promoters cannot alter their defence at the review stage. The ruling underscores the importance of consistent factual presentation.