LawMirror.com

Results of defendant

Showing : 191-200 of 5368 Results

BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Hindu Law -- Ancestral property - Alienation by Karta - Legal necessity - It is for defendants to prove that Karta of family was required to sell property and had no alternative left to raise funds for family - Mere statements by witnesses that Karta/defendant No.1 was heavily indebted due to medical expenses incurred on treatment of his wife was not sufficient for..........

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 96 -- First Appeal - Decree for specific performance - Decree put into execution - Entire proceedings of trial including examination of two witnesses and final arguments completed within a period of 31 days from date civil Court recorded that defendant/appellant did not have written statement to file - Defendant is categorical in his..........

TELANGANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 15A -- Non-payment of arrears of rent - Striking off defence - Defendant contended that plaintiff did not receive the amounts - However, if it was really true, nothing prevented defendant for making deposit of amount of Rs.2,88,000 in Court itself and then informing counsel for plaintiff of the same - No evidence on record of payments of..........

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Trade Marks Act, 1999, Section 27, 29 -- Infringement of Trademark - Passing off - Difference - Infringement of trademark means violation of exclusive rights granted to registered proprietor under the Act to use the same in relation to the goods or service in respect of which trademark is registered - Whereas Passing off of a trademark is a tort actionable under common law..........

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Trade Marks Act, 1999, Section 2, 29 -- Infringement of Trademark - There is sufficient documents on record to show that plaintiff No.1 is registered proprietor of the trademark `SWETON' - Moreover, mark of plaintiff `SWETON' and mark of defendant `SWEETON' is deceptively similar and identical - Looking at mark with artistic, visual, phonetic and structural standpoints,..........

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Trade Marks Act, 1999, Section 29 -- Infringement of Trademark - Principle of Priority - Admittedly, defendant has been using the mark since 2013 and plaintiff is using the said mark since 1982 - Thus, it is sufficient to come to the conclusion that the defendant does not have any right on the mark `SWEETON' superior to that of the mark `SWETON' of the plaintiff -..........

BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 8, Rule 6A -- Counter claim - Commercial dispute - Defendant filed its written statement within 120 days of receipt of summons - He cannot be prohibited from filing counter claim only because it failed to raise same in written statement - Defendant thus, entitled to raise its counter claim only in respect of cause of action limited by..........

MADRAS HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Will -- Proof of - Attesting witness of Will DW1 stated that he does not know date, month and year of execution of Will and he was not informed in advance about the execution of Will - DW1 Appears to be stock witness - He has not named other attesting witness and he does not deposed that testator had witnessed his attestation as well as attestation of other attestor -..........

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 38 -- Permanent injunction - Report of Local Commissioner as to raising some construction by defendant - Plaintiff did not enter witness box - However, his brother who is co-sharer in the suit land entered the witness box claimed to be in possession of suit land but did not depose about defendant having raised the construction over the..........

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2019
Details

Defamation -- Suit for damages - Harm to reputation - Whether harm was actually caused or not is immaterial - Even intention to cause harm to reputation is not a necessary factor to be proved - It is enough, if it is shown that defendant had reason to believe that imputations are likely to harm the reputation...........

Showing : 191-200 of 5368 Results