Disputes & Litigation

[Judgment] Raj HC on ‘Online Fantasy Games’ being a game of skill and not gambling/betting

admin
In a recent judgment passed by the Rajasthan High Court on October 16, 2020, it has been held that Dream11’s online fantasy sports games do not construe betting/gambling. In this matter, a Public Interest Litigation was filed alleging that Dream 11 Private Limited Company provides a platform for the users to bet on the cricket team. Further, it was also...
Capital Markets

[Updates] SEBI (AIF) (Amendment) Regulation, 2020

admin
On 19 October, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Board of India has notified an amendment to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Investment Funds) Regulations, 2016 (AIFs Regulations). By way of said amendment, it prescribes the conditions for the investment team as well as the investment committee formed by the investment managers of the alternative investment funds (AIFs)....
Disputes & Litigation

[Judgment] Words have three meanings – literal meaning, indicative or suggestive meaning, and figurative meaning.

admin
“Can the husband and wife be considered to be a separate legal entity when the wife is dependent on him?” - was the question that was raised before the division bench of the Honourable Supreme in the matter of Surjit Singh vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited through a Civil Appeal No 5354 of the Year 2002.  In this matter, the...
Corporate & Commercial

Municipal Corporation of greater Mumbai (MCGM) vs. Abhilash Lal & Ors.

admin
Case name - Municipal Corporation of greater Mumbai (MCGM) vs. Abhilash Lal & Ors. Case number - Civil Appeal No. 6350 of 2019 Forum - Supreme Court of India Bench - Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Justice Arun Mishra, Justice Vineet Saran Decided on - November 15, 2019 Relevant Act/Sections - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 238; Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 - Section 92;...

Corporate & Commercial

Corporate & Commercial

Supreme Court on the concept of ‘Earnest Money’ and Section 74 of Indian Contract Act.

admin

The plaintiff commenced an action for amount of Rs 20000/- with interest, trial court held that government was not justified in forfeiting the contract, as they suffered no loss. The High Court held that even though the amount was stipulation by way of penalty, government is entitled to receive reasonable compensation irrespective of whether actual damage is caused or not. The High Court awarded the plaintiff 416.25 with interest. Aggrieved by the decision, plaintiff applied to the Supreme Court through special leave petition.

Intellectual Property Rights

Taxation

Capital Markets

Media & Entertainment

Disputes & Litigation

Corporate & Commercial