![[Trademark Dispute] Bombay HC Grants Interim Relief to 'Burger King' in Case Against Pune Eatery](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/image-48-3.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, On 26th August, The Bombay High Court issued an interim stay on a Pune court’s decision to allow a local burger joint to use the ‘Burger King’ trademark. The U.S.-based Burger King Corporation contested the ruling, claiming brand reputation damage. The court requested documents for review and scheduled a further hearing. The local restaurant had been using the name since 1992, pre-dating the corporation’s trademark registration in India. The Pune court ruled in favor of the local establishment, citing lack of evidence for damages claimed by both parties.
A bench consisting of Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh was hearing the Congress’ appeal against the Delhi High Court’s March 13 order, which found no reason to interfere with the ITAT’s decision. However, the High Court permitted the Congress to file a new stay application before the ITAT, taking into account developments such […]
Today, On 12th July, The Bombay High Court advised Indrani Mukerjea to handle her banking tasks in Spain and the UK from India if possible, rather than traveling. The court warned her not to undertake additional tasks beyond those listed in her application for travel. The court extended the stay on her travel until August 27, and requested a detailed list of tasks that need to be completed abroad and whether they can be done from India. Indrani Mukerjea was granted bail in May 2022 after being arrested in connection with the murder of her daughter, Sheena Bora, in 2015, along with other accused individuals.
The Supreme Court granted interim relief to NewsClick in two income tax dispute cases, after the portal had already deposited 30 percent of the assessed amount with the tax department. The court questioned the freezing of NewsClick’s account and stayed any further recovery of the disputed tax amount. This comes after a series of legal battles and rejected pleas.
The Supreme Court today extended its interim order, maintaining the stay on directives from BJP-governed states that required eateries along Kanwar Yatra routes to display owner and staff details. The opposition criticized these directives as divisive, discriminatory against Muslims. The court promised an early hearing and expressed disapproval of the Uttar Pradesh government’s failure to comply with its order.
![[Defamation Case] Delhi Court Summons India Today's Aroon Purie For Complaint Filed by Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/image-110.png?resize=447%2C270&ssl=1)
A Delhi court summoned Aroon Purie and India Today in a defamation case filed by Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai. Rai alleges that the media outlet published articles linking him to conman Sanjay Sherpuria. The legal proceedings highlight the complexities of defamation law in India and the accountability of media executives for published content.
Today, On 26th July, The Supreme Court ruled that eateries can voluntarily display owner and employee names during the Kanwar Yatra. It extended the stay on directives from certain states, allowing businesses to choose whether to make such information public. The Court emphasized the absence of restrictions on voluntary display and granted two weeks for states to respond. This decision stemmed from petitions challenging the requirement to display names during the Yatra. Critics argued that this directive discriminated against Muslim shop owners, while the governments of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand defended it as a means to ensure dietary adherence and prevent potential law and order issues during the Yatra. The Court reiterated that voluntary disclosure is permitted while requesting states to clarify the applicability of their mandates.
Today, On 22nd July, The Delhi High Court instructed Subramanian Swamy, Sonia Gandhi, and Rahul Gandhi to submit written arguments in the National Herald case within four weeks. Any submissions after this period will incur a cost of Rs 15,000. The court scheduled the case for arguments on October 29, following a plea from Swamy seeking to present evidence.
The Hindu Front asked the Supreme Court to lift the interim stay on the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Complex dispute. The ongoing legal battle centers around the religious significance of the site for both Hindu and Muslim communities. The Supreme Court agreed to consider listing the petition related to the dispute and declined to halt the ASI survey at the disputed sites.
The Calcutta High Court ordered an interim stay on the investigation into 47 FIRs against BJP workers in West Bengal. The court directed the state government to address claims of malafide intentions behind the FIRs, stating that the preliminary investigation should have concluded by now, making further police probe unnecessary at this stage. The petitioners allege political motivation and seek the quashing or transfer of the investigation. The state refutes the allegations and assures a fair investigation.