In In Re: The Berubari Union and Exchange of Enclaves (1960), the Supreme Court of India held that ceding Indian territory to a foreign state, even for settling boundary disputes, requires a constitutional amendment under Article 368. The Court clarified that such cessions cannot be made under Artic

In International Woolen Mills v. Standard Wool (U.K.) Ltd., the Supreme Court of India held that a foreign decree cannot be enforced in India if it is not passed on merits or violates principles of natural justice. The case involved an ex parte decree by a UK court, which lacked substantive examinat

The case of Bhuri Nath & Ors. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir upheld the constitutionality of the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988, which transferred shrine management to a public board. The Supreme Court ruled that the Baridars’ customary rights to collect offerings could be extinguished for pub

In Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court addressed whether playing the National Anthem in cinema halls should be mandatory. Initially, it required the anthem to be played before films, with attendees standing in respect. However, the Court later revised this, making the

In Bijoe Emmanuel & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors. (1986), the Supreme Court of India ruled that expelling students for refusing to sing the National Anthem due to their religious beliefs violated their Fundamental Rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 25(1). The Court held that standing respectfully d

In Shanker Housing Corporation (Ext.) v. Mohan Devi & Ors., the Delhi High Court ruled that under Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, a firm can only sue a third party if the firm is registered and all partners involved in the lawsuit were listed in the Register of Firms at the time the sui

In Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd. (2003), the Bombay High Court ruled that while ideas themselves are not protected by copyright, the specific expression of those ideas can be. The court found that the defendant had violated the plaintiff’s confidentiality and had infringed u

In Macmillan And Company Ltd. v. K. And J. Cooper, the Bombay High Court addressed the issue of copyright infringement. The appellant’s abridged version of North’s Life of Alexander included original notes. The court ruled that while neither party’s abridgement qualified as original literary work, t

In Academy of General Education Manipal v. Malini Mallya (AIR 2009 SC 1982), the Supreme Court of India affirmed Malini Mallya’s copyright over the YakshaRanga ballets created by Dr. Kota Shivarama Karanth. The Court upheld Sections 13 and 17 of the Copyright Act, 1957, establishing that Mallya, as

In Dalmia Cement Ltd. v. Galaxy Traders & Agencies Ltd. (2001), the Supreme Court of India held that a dishonored cheque can be presented multiple times during its validity, with each dishonor giving rise to a new cause of action under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court overtur

In Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that Rural’s white pages directory was not eligible for copyright protection because it lacked originality. The Court ruled that copyright applies only to works with a minimum level of creativity, rejecting the “

In R.G. Anand v. M/S. Delux Films & Ors., the Supreme Court of India clarified that copyright protection extends to the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. The case revolved around the alleged infringement of the play Hum Hindustani by the film New Delhi. The Court ruled that since the simil

In Creation Records Ltd v. News Group Newspapers Ltd (1997), the High Court held that a photograph taken during a photo shoot for the band Oasis did not infringe on the copyright of the artistic props used in the scene. The court ruled that the photograph was an independent and original creation by

In Ramlal, Motilal, and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd., the Supreme Court clarified that under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, a party seeking condonation of delay must only explain the delay that occurred after the last day of the prescribed period, not their entire conduct during the limitatio

In Union of India (UOI) v. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd., the Supreme Court ruled that the limitation period for filing suits to recover excess freight charges should be calculated from the final adjudication date by the highest court, not the initial tribunal order. The Court clarified that claims fo

In I.T.C. Limited v. George Joseph Fernandes (1989), the Supreme Court addressed whether a contract could be deemed void due to mutual mistake. The appellant claimed the trawlers provided were defective, arguing the contract was void based on a fundamental defect. However, the court held that the co

In Mathai Mathai v. Joseph Mary (2015), the Supreme Court of India ruled that a mortgage deed executed by a minor was void ab initio, citing Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The court invalidated the appellant’s claim of tenancy rights under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, as the mortgage w

In N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998), the Supreme Court of India held that the length of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is immaterial, provided a reasonable and bona fide explanation is given. The Court emphasized that procedural rules should not obstruct justice, especially wh

In M.S. Narayana Menon v. State of Kerala (2006), the Supreme Court clarified that the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is rebuttable. The accused is not required to disprove liability beyond a reasonable doubt but only needs to raise a credible defense that cre

In the case Starbucks Coffee v. Sardarbuksh Coffee & Co., the Delhi High Court ruled that Sardarbuksh’s brand name and logo were deceptively similar to Starbucks, causing potential confusion among consumers. The Court ordered Sardarbuksh to rebrand as “Sardarji-Bakhsh Coffee & Co.” due to the phonet

In Patel Roadways Ltd., Bombay v. Prasad Trading Co., the Supreme Court ruled that a suit against a corporation can be filed where its subordinate office is located, even if its registered office is elsewhere. The court invalidated the exclusive jurisdiction clause, emphasizing convenience for plain

In Sampelly Satyanarayana Rao v. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd., the Supreme Court ruled that post-dated cheques issued as security can attract liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act if they represent a legally enforceable debt at the time of dishonor. The Cou

In K.D. Kamath & Co. v. CIT (1971), the Supreme Court of India held that the validity of a partnership depends on the genuine intention of the partners to share profits and losses, irrespective of who controls the business. The Court ruled that extensive control by one partner does not negate the ex

In Cox v. Hickman (1860), the House of Lords held that participation in profits does not necessarily constitute a partnership. The case involved trustees managing a business to repay creditors. The trustees, including Hickman, did not intend to form a partnership but acted in a fiduciary capacity. T

In Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra (2014), the Supreme Court of India ruled that complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be filed in the court with territorial jurisdiction where the cheque is dishonoured, not where it was presented or the statutory notic