India: Trials & Appeals & Compensation

The Supreme Court of India has significantly altered the landscape for enforcing foreign summary judgments in India by holding that English summary judgments refusing leave to defend cannot be considered judgments "on the merits" under Indian law. This landmark ruling examines whether a foreign court's refusal to grant leave to defend, despite the existence of bona fide triable issues, satisfies the requirements of natural justice and merits-based adjudication under the Code of Civil Procedure.

The judgment consolidates many petitions filed by individuals with varied backgrounds, including persons who have been acquitted of criminal charges, parties to matrimonial disputes, individuals whose names appeared incidentally in judicial records, amongst others

This article examines the legal framework governing the admissibility of electronic evidence under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, with particular reference to the requirements of hash value disclosure and expert certification. It analyses the procedural safeguards mandated by recent judicial pronouncements and the practical challenges faced by investigators, lawyers, and courts in ensuring the authenticity and reliability of digital evidence.

One of the defining features of arbitration is the finality of the arbitral award. Parties choose arbitration as an alternative to conventional litigation largely because it offers efficiency, autonomy and a conclusive resolution of disputes. However, like any adjudicatory process, arbitral awards may occasionally contain clerical mistakes, computational inaccuracies or typographical errors that require correction after the award has been rendered.

The Delhi High Court has ruled on a trademark dispute involving the mark ALPHARD, examining whether transborder reputation and unsolicited imports of luxury vehicles into India can establish goodwill sufficient to qualify a mark as 'well-known' under Indian law. The case required the court to distinguish the Supreme Court's Prius decision and evaluate whether voluntary importation by third parties, without formal commercial launch, demonstrates actionable recognition within the relevant consumer segment.

The Supreme Court examined whether a party alleging fiduciary misuse in property transactions executed through a General Power of Attorney must first establish foundational facts of fraud before the burden shifts to the beneficiaries.

The Supreme Court examined whether the use of abusive language constitutes obscenity under Indian Penal Code provisions, focusing on the distinction between vulgar speech and legally obscene material. The ruling establishes critical precedent on when offensive language crosses into criminal obscenity, requiring sexual connotation rather than mere vulgarity.

The present Article analyses how the Supreme Court held that the meaning of "a party" under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) cannot be contextually modulated depending on the outcome of the Arbitral Proceedings, effectively overruling the Bombay High Court's restrictive interpretation in Dirk India.

The Supreme Court of India has once again reaffirmed the settlement-oriented philosophy underlying cheque dishonour litigation by holding that an offence under Section 138...