Search for: "Kumar v. State"
Results 161 - 180
of 334
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Oct 2013, 7:57 pm
See Dickinson v. [read post]
17 Sep 2013, 8:17 am
In last week’s case (Miles v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 9:23 am
Pranesh further criticized the decision of Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi High Court in John Wiley v. [read post]
1 Sep 2013, 8:12 am
Kumar v. [read post]
10 Aug 2013, 2:22 pm
In the case of 20th Century Fox Film Corporation v. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 7:42 am
Encapture.com, Privacy Services / Ravindra Kumar Lahoti, D2013-0268 (WIPO April 17, 2013). [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 4:55 am
This test was laid down in R v Oakes and followed by the Supreme Court in Santosh Kumar Bariyar v. [read post]
13 May 2013, 2:43 pm
(C.), 2002 CanLII 9172 (QC CA) – (French) Kumar v. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 12:01 pm
Sanjeev Kumar Chaswal) that the constitution of the Search-cum-Selection Committee must be in conformity with the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 11:30 am
Wells noted the Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel v. [read post]
3 Mar 2013, 8:42 pm
Moving on further, Aparajita highlighted the Bombay High court’s recent decision on Trademark infringement of SABMiller India Ltd. v/s Som. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 6:37 am
See KSR Int’l, Co. v. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 3:30 am
Kumar v. [read post]
2 Dec 2012, 7:52 pm
Jindal Global University; Formerly Professor and Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, India Enforcing Socio-Economic Rights through Public Interest Litigation: An Overview of the Indian Experience 3) Dr Leïla Choukroune, Senior Lecturer in International Economic Law, Faculty of Law, Maastricht University, The Netherlands The Paradox of Justiciability: Labour PIL in China and India Questions/Comments 6:30pm-8:30pm – Welcome Dinner hosted by the City University Law School (by… [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods to protect against their parallel importation into the United States. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
The Software and Information Industry Association, arguing that “the Copyright Act contains the flexibility to deal with unforeseen applications of section 602″, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods… [read post]
13 Oct 2012, 9:23 pm
On the other hand, on behalf of the respondent, State of West Bengal, in opposition to that plea, reliance was placed on a later decision of this Court in Akbar Sheikh and others v. [read post]
7 Oct 2012, 8:54 pm
United Industrial Bank, Ashok Kumar Lingala v. [read post]
1 Oct 2012, 11:54 pm
Madhavan Sunil Kumar (1998) 6 SCC 514 which laid down that cause of action under Section 138 arose only once and if the concept of successive causes of action were to be accepted the same would make the limitation under Section 142(b) otiose.In Sadanandan Bhadran v. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 6:46 am
In the leading Indian decision on the point, Linklaters v ITO, this solution has been rejected. [read post]
