Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 12 To March 18, 2023

Nominal Index [Citation 135 - 147]Pidilite Industries Limited v. Chiripal Industries Limited 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 135Jetair Pvt Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 136Mahendranath Vidyaniwas Trivedi v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 137All India Service Engineers Association v. Union of India and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 138Sara Chemicals and Consultants v. Deepak Nitrite Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 139Gouri Abhay Bhide and Anr v. Union of India and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 140Lakshdeep Investments & Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 141Mantras Green Resources Ltd. & Ors. v. Canara Bank 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 142Dagadu Shivaji Lodhe And Anr v. Bhaurao Fakira Dongre And Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 143Murlidhar Waman Bombale & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 144Sangeeta Natwarlal Karwa and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 145State of Maharashtra and Ors v. Surendra G. Ghodake 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 146Chandrapur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 147Reports/JudgmentsFevicol v. Tickawoo: Bombay High Court Finds No Prima Facie "Deceptive Similarity" In Logos, Grants Interim Relief For Certain ProductsCase Title: Pidilite Industries Limited v. Chiripal Industries LimitedCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 135The Bombay High Court held that there is no prima facie deceptive similarity between Fevicol manufacturer Pidilite Industries’ logo having two elephants against backdrop of a sunset and Chiripal Industries’ logo having containing word Tikawoo with the device of a rhino against the backdrop of sun.The court however, granted interim injunction in favour of Pidilite restraining Chiripal from using marks similar or identical to plaintiff’s “HEATX”, “LW+”, and “LW” marks.Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Proceedings Against JetairCase Title: Jetair Pvt Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 136The Bombay High Court quashed the reassessment proceedings against Jetair Pvt Ltd, a group entity of Jet Airways (India) Ltd, and has set aside the notice issued by the revenue department under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 against Jetair, seeking to reopen assessment for the relevant assessment year.The bench of Justices Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Kamal Khata rejected the contentions raised by revenue department that payment of commission to Jetair, who is a sales agent of Jet Airways, at a rate lower than what is charged by it from other unrelated airlines on the domestic and international ticket sales, was a colourable device, with an aim to evade tax.Documents Dubious: Bombay High Court Upholds ONGC’s Ban On Contractor From Participating In Tender ProcessCase Title: Mahendranath Vidyaniwas Trivedi v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 137Observing that it was a question of a public tender process being subverted by ex-facie dubious documents, the Bombay High Court rejected a contractor’s petition against the Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.A division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale refused to set aside ONGC’s order banning the petitioner - Carlton Industries Engineers from participating in any of the bids for six months. The petitioner was banned after ONGC’s enquiry officer concluded that Carlton had submitted a revised Undated Completion Certificate in collusion with the Project Coordinator of work at ONGC with a sole intent to take advantage and get themselves qualified for tender.“…The undated certificate seems to shower compliments on the Petitioner, apart from wishing him great success and all good luck. To say that we have never seen ONGC or its officers acting in so magnanimous fashion with any contractor might be a great understatement,” the bench observed.The court also said there were disputed questions of fact which couldn’t be adjudicated in the petition under Article 226 of the constitution.Eviction Of Air India Employees Due To Privatisation Cannot Be Termed An Industrial Dispute: Bombay High CourtCase Title: All India Service Engineers Association v. Union of India and Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 138 Holding that Air India employees were granted accommodation on leave and license and not as a matter of right, the Bombay High Court held that eviction of employees due to privatisation cannot be termed an Industrial dispute.A division bench of Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V Marne dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by employee unions of Air India challenging the Central Government’s refusal to refer the dispute to the industrial tribunal.Arbitrator’s Direction For Disclosure Of Not Relevant Information Is An Order Under S. 19 And Not 17 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Sara Chemicals and Consultants v. Deepak Nitrite LtdCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 139The Bombay High Court ruled that no appeal is maintainable...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 12 To March 18, 2023

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags