legalvidhiya.com - Legal Vidhiya

The Supreme Court refuses to restore injunction against Blinkit in a trademark dispute, stating that Blinkhit has no turnover at all.

Keywords: Trademark infringement, Temporary injunction, Blinkit. In a trademark infringement case brought by Bangalore-based startup Blinkhit, the Karnataka High Court had granted relief to e-commerce grocery delivery service Blinkit, and the Supreme Court on Friday declined to invalidate that decision [Blinkhit Private Limited and anr v. Blink Commerce Private Limited]. Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 4, 2023 ago

LEGAL NEWS

Calcutta High Court Upholds Interim Hike in Minimum Wage For Tea-Plantation Workers, Directs State To Finalize Minimum Wage In 6 Months

On 3rd August,2023 it was reported that the Calcutta High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the representatives of several tea plantations in West Bengal, for quashing an advisory issued by the State Labor Commissioner to the lower court dated 27th April, 2023; which was based on the Minimum Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 4, 2023 ago

Article

EXPLORING THE LEGAL CHALLENGES OF REGULATING AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS SUCH AS ROBOTS AND DRONES

This article is written by Mukta Priya of 7th Semester of Gitam University, an intern under Legal Vidhiya Abstract Autonomous systems, such as robots and drones, have transformed a wide range of industries by providing unprecedented levels of efficiency, productivity, and convenience. Their rapid development, however, has outpaced the creation Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 4, 2023 ago

Article

IMPACT OF FORENSIC SCIENCE: EVIDENTIARY VALUE IN DNA TEST, NARCO-ANALYSIS

This article is written by Diprava Ghosh, an intern under Legal Vidhiya ABSTRACT: – The usefulness of the narco-analysis test as evidence plays a crucial role in the criminal investigative process. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is entirely blank regarding the use of such scientific methodology in the Narco-Analysis Test. Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 4, 2023 ago

Case Laws

State vs 1. Dharambir

State vs 1. Dharambir Case Name: State vs 1. Dharambir Date of judgment: 13 August 2009 Court: TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI DISTRICT COURTS Case Type: Criminal Appeal Case Number: SC No.36/08 Appellant: 1. Dharambir,2. Vicky, 3. Raju, Respondent: State Bench: SMT. PRATIBHA RANI, ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE Statues Referred: Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 3, 2023 ago

Case Laws

Track 1 vs Superintendent of Police

Track 1 vs Superintendent of Police Case Name: Track 1 vs Superintendent Of Police Date of judgment: 22 April, 2013 Court: THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Case Type: Criminal Appeal Case Number: Crl.MC.No. 1798 of 2013 Appellant: SAJEEV – AGAINST THE ORDER IN SC 1075/2007 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 3, 2023 ago

Case Laws

Lathi Singh @ Sujit Singh vs The State Of Bihar

Lathi Singh @ Sujit Singh vs The State Of Bihar Case Name: Lathi Singh @ Sujit Singh vs The State Of Bihar Date of judgment: 5th August 2010 Court: Patna High Court Case Type: Criminal Appeal Case Number: Death Reference No. 3 of 2008With CR. APPEAL (DB) No.72 of 200 With Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 3, 2023 ago

LEGAL NEWS

Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya mature into chief justice of the Bombay High Court

Keywords– Bombay, Chief justice, Mumbai Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya was sworn in as chief justice of the Bombay high court. Before acting as existing holder of Bombay High court “Nitin Madhukar Jamdar” since 31st May 2023. On Saturday, Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya was sworn in as chief justice of the Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 3, 2023 ago

LEGAL NEWS

APPEAL FILED IN SUPREME COURT AGAINST PATNA HIGH COURT VERDICT UPHOLDING BIHAR CASTE SURVEY

The survey was conducted by the General Administration Department of the Bihar Government, where the caste of the people living in the area was reviewed and the survey was conducted on 7th January 2023. But, due to many comments made by the general public on 1st August, an order was Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 3, 2023 ago

LEGAL NEWS

PERSON SUMMONED UNDER SECTION 319 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 NEED NOT BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEFORE BEING ADDED AS ACCUSED: SUPREME COURT

In the case of, Yashodhan Singh & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., the Supreme Court held that it is not mandatory to allow a person who is summoned under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 because that person has been added by the trial court Read more

By Admin, 3 yearsAugust 3, 2023 ago