Keeping Pace with Legal Change
In a desperate bid to halt the release of a new film based on his life, the Bollywood superstar Salman Khan approached the Delhi High…
This paper discusses a PIL filed in the Bombay High Court alleging that Prada had infringed the Kolhapuri chappals. It discusses the sustainability of PIL on the issue of IPR, especially on traditional knowledge and GI tags. The debate raises issues and advantages about the applicability of PIL as an instrument to have global business undermine the rights of culture and craftsmanship.
The article goes into discussing an interim injunction by the Bengaluru court against Kamal Haasan, preventing him from making anti-Kannada statements that allege superiority, or defame its culture. This order, extended until August 30, 2025, was sought by Kannada Sahitya Parishattu on behalf of the Kannadigas.
In Microfibers Pvt. Ltd. v. Yes Bank Ltd., the Bombay High Court criticized the bank’s insistence on Aadhaar to open an account, even in violation of Supreme Court orders prohibiting compulsion. The petitioner, whose inability to rent property without a bank account led to this writ, petitioned for Rs. 10 lakhs in compensation. Finding constitutional violation and monetary loss, the Court granted a compensation of Rs. 50,000. The decision upholds citizen rights under Article 21 and asserts institutional accountability in the compliance with privacy and service access jurisprudence following Puttaswamy.
In Union of India & Ors. v. Maj Gen Rajesh Chaba (Retd), the Delhi High Court affirmed the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal directing disability pension for soldiers afflicted with diseases such as hypertension and ischaemic heart disease, even on peace postings. The Court held that stress inherent in military life warrants presumption of service connection under the Entitlement Rules. It spurned non-verdict medical board views that were without reasoned detail and noted pensions are a constitutional entitlement, not charity. This ruling reinforces welfare jurisprudence and requires accountability and transparency from medical boards in determining disabilities.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Karnataka High Court’s ruling. The Court reiterated that insurance companies are not liable to pay compensation when the accident is caused by the deceased’s own rash and negligent driving
On July 2, 2025, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment clarifying that legal heirs of a driver who dies due to his own rash and negligent driving are not entitled to compensation from insurance companies under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The Gujarat High Court has initiated contempt proceedings against senior advocate Bhaskar Tanna for allegedly sipping beer during a virtual hearing. This incident highlights the critical need to maintain judicial decorum in digital spaces, underscoring that virtual courtrooms demand the same respect as physical ones.
In Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs Udai Singh, the Delhi High Court upheld the termination of a constable who had been taking unauthorized leave repeatedly over the course of many years. Despite producing medical certificates, the Court held them vague and without corresponding procedures. It held habitual absenteeism in disciplined services such as the police as habitual misconduct. Overriding the CAT’s reinstatement order, the Court underscored the supremacy of discipline and strict adherence to leave procedures in police forces.
On July 1, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court—which was established by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand—provide a important ruling stressing on…
In Amazon vs. Lifestyle Equities, the High Court examined whether Amazon’s “Symbol” polo logo infringed Beverly Hills Polo Club’s trademark. The court highlighted consumer confusion and stressed fair procedure, staying the hefty damages award until Amazon could fully defend itself.
