In a standard essential patent (SEP) royalty rate-setting suit, preferred against the plaintiff before the Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court (hereinafter referred to as “the Wuhan Court”), the defendant moved an application,
Submitted by:A. Mohammed Ibrahim. B. Arch, FICA.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sVbcBo2U4gdeWmevcFJ1YRrXig7eYLb8/view?usp=sharing
Applying the ratio of decision in Kishan Lal (Supra) to the present case, I find that the learned trial court has rightly dismissed petitioner’s bail application while holding that though
Without going into the question of whether Section 438,Cr.P.C. itself allows for such a power, as it is not necessary toundertake such an exercise in the present case, it is
As regards addition of the parties i.e. the parties who are not arrayed as the parties to the suit by the plaintiffs, the Rule 15 clearly permits addition of such parties in
Shri Pramod Dayal, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that in a suit for injunction, cause of action is based upon the threat of dispossession and interference with peaceful possession
Lastly, the counsel on behalf of the appellant argued that without any charges under Section 498A, IPC a conviction under Section 304-B, IPC cannot be sustained. On this aspect this
It appears that the learned counsel for the appellant is entertaining an apprehension regarding the prejudice which may likely to be caused to the appellant if the investigating officer has
