Posts

Navigating Money Recovery Suit Case Laws: Claiming What’s Yours

Image
Money recovery disputes are as old as commerce itself. Whether it’s a handshake deal gone wrong or a complex contractual default, the pursuit of one’s rightful dues often finds its way into the courtroom. The money recovery suit case laws in India provide a structured legal recourse for individuals and businesses looking to recover their debts. But this process is not without its nuances. The first recorded lawsuit for money recovery dates back to ancient Mesopotamia around 2300 B.C.? When it comes to money recovery suit case laws, precision, procedure and persistence are key. Filing a recovery suit can seem daunting, but armed with the right legal knowledge and strategic foresight, you can navigate the Indian legal system with confidence. Understanding Money Recovery Suit Case Laws At the heart of money recovery suit case laws lie the  Indian Contract Act, 1872 , which governs any agreement or contract between two or more parties. If one party fails to fulfill their obligations — ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Navigating Trademark Disputes in India: Lessons from the Mc Prefix Case

Image
  I. The Growing Complexity of Trademark Battles in India Trademark disputes in India are no longer confined to straightforward cases of name copying or logo imitation. As Indian markets mature and brand portfolios expand, courts are increasingly being called upon to interpret nuanced doctrines of  trademark law , including the “family of marks” concept. One such case that drew national and international attention recently was  McDonald’s Corporation v. McPatel Food & Beverages , involving the use of the prefix “Mc” by a local food business. This legal contest wasn’t just about two names beginning with similar syllables. It raised serious questions about how far a global brand’s monopoly on a prefix can extend and how Indian courts are beginning to shape jurisprudence on familial trademarks—those forming a pattern within a well-known brand’s portfolio. II. The McDonald’s v. McPatel Dispute The dispute arose when McDonald’s, the American fast-food giant, filed a tradem...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Public Participation and Crowdsourcing Are Reshaping Patent Examination

  The Shifting Landscape of Patent Scrutiny For centuries, the patent examination process has operated as a largely internal exercise, insulated from the public eye and reliant on examiners to assess novelty, inventive step, and utility within the constraints of limited resources and time. But with an explosion in the volume and complexity of  patent filings , particularly in fast-evolving technological fields, that model is showing its cracks. To address this, a quiet but meaningful shift has taken hold across patent offices around the world: inviting the public to participate in the patent examination process. Through structured crowdsourcing platforms, third-party submissions, and pre-grant opposition mechanisms, individuals, industry stakeholders, and subject-matter experts are increasingly being called upon to bring forward relevant prior art and challenge weak claims before they become enforceable rights. Explore More:  Intellectual Property Legal F...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Overriding Effect Of Special Laws Over General Laws

 The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of  M/S Harcharan Dass Gupta v Union of India  delivered a significant ruling affirming the precedence of the  Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act 2006   (MSMED Act)  over  Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996   (A&C Act)  in disputes involving Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises  (MSMEs) . This judgment clarifies the legal framework governing the dispute resolution process for  (MSMEs)  and also highlights the special protections provided by special laws, which would have an overriding effect over general laws.  Factual Background The present case arises from a contractual dispute between the  Indian Space   Research Organisation   (ISRO)  and the appellant, a supplier duly registered under the MSMED Act of 2006. Pursuant to a tender floated by  ISRO  for the construction of staff quarters in New Delhi, the appell...
Post a Comment
Read more

Tracking Patent Mentions in India: A Guide to Monitoring Media, Academic Citations, and Litigation Mentions

 Patent owners, counsel, and legal advisory teams need clear insight into how their intellectual property is discussed publicly. Tracking patent mentions across media, academic literature, and legal proceedings serves multiple purposes: Detecting potential infringement or reputation risk triggered by press coverage. Gauging patent value through forward citations in research and scholarly articles. Keeping abreast of court filings, oppositions, and hearings that could affect enforcement strategy. In India, effective monitoring relies on a combination of tools, both subscription-based and open-access, and an understanding of the legal context.  Related:  IP law firm Media Monitoring  When patents are mentioned in mainstream or business media, it’s often a signal of larger commercial, legal, or policy developments. For instance, if a pharmaceutical patent dispute enters public debate, timely awareness allows rights holders to prepare legal...
Post a Comment
Read more

Generative AI & Copyright Law in India: Who Owns Machine-Made Works?

 In May 2025, the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India, constituted an eight‑member expert panel to evaluate whether the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter, “the Act”) adequately addresses the unique challenges presented by generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). The impetus was twofold: ongoing litigation—most prominently  Ani Media (P) Ltd. v. Open AI Inc, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 8120 , along with actions by the Federation of Indian Publishers, NDTV, Indian Express, and Hindustan Times alleging unauthorized use of copyrighted material in AI training, and the recognition that a statute enacted in the pre-digital era lacks explicit provisions for attributing authorship or ownership in the context of  AI-generated  works. While the Ministry previously asserted that existing legal frameworks (including Section 52 of Copyright Act,1957 that states about the “fair dealing” exception) are sufficient to govern AI use , particularly insofar as commerc...
Post a Comment
Read more