Bombay High Court Temporarily Bars Salon From Using 'Jawed Habib' Marks After Franchise Expiry

The Bombay High Court has temporarily restrained a local salon operator from using the “Jawed Habib”, “Jawed Habib Hair & Beauty” and “JH” names and logos, holding that their use after the end of a franchise agreement amounts to prima facie trademark and copyright infringement.A single-judge Bench of Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh passed the ad-interim order on January 6, 2026, in favour of the popular hair salon franschise Jawed Habib Hair & Beauty Limited. The restraint will...

High Courts Cannot Exercise Parallel Contempt Jurisdiction Over NCLT In IBC Cases: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Monday held that contempt petitions alleging breach of orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal in insolvency cases cannot be filed directly before the High Court. A single-judge bench of Justice Milind N Jadhav said that once contempt powers are conferred on the NCLT by law, the High Court should not exercise parallel jurisdiction. “Hence, once such contempt jurisdiction is vested in the tribunal, this court ought not to exercise parallel contempt...

Bombay High Court Imposes ₹15 Lakhs Cost On Anrose Pharma For Infringing 'ZERODOL' Trademark

The Bombay High Court has held that Anrose Pharma's adoption and use of the trade mark 'ZEROVOL-P' in respect of pharmaceutical products amounted to a clear case of infringement and passing off of IPCA Laboratories Limited's registered trade mark 'ZERODOL'. The Court observed that in matters involving medicinal products, a stricter standard of comparison is required, as even a likelihood of confusion poses a serious risk to public health. Justice Arif S. Doctor was hearing a commercial...

Reassessment Notice To Non-Existent Firm Invalid: Bombay High Court Reiterates

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that proceedings initiated against a non-existent entity are invalid in law. A Division Bench of Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Amit S. Jamsandekar set aside a reassessment notice and a consequential assessment order issued under the Income Tax Act against a partnership firm that had merged into a private limited company years earlier. The case concerned a notice issued to J M Mhatre Infra Pvt. Ltd., described as an erstwhile partnership firm, seeking to...

Bombay High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Passed With “Undue Haste” After Four-Year Delay

The Bombay High Court has set aside an arbitral award, holding that it was passed in undue haste after nearly four years of inaction and without giving the parties any opportunity of hearing.A Single Bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne found that the arbitrator acted with undue haste and in clear breach of natural justice. Rejecting the explanation offered for the long delay, the Court said, “The explanation put forth by the Arbitrator for the delay is factually incorrect. The Arbitrator...

Bombay High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Awards Holding Sharekhan Liable For Investor Losses In F&O Trades

The Bombay High Court recently ruled that mere violation of SEBI's trade confirmation circular does not automatically make a broker liable for market losses, and it set aside arbitral awards that directed stockbroker Sharekhan Limited to reimburse investors for losses sustained in Futures and Options (F&O) trading. The Single Bench on 24th December, 2025, decided that investors who authorised an individual to trade on their behalf could not thereafter retract those trades and shift losses to...

Bombay High Court Bars Restaurant Chains Operating 94 Outlets From Playing PPL Music Without License

The Bombay High Court has, in an interim order, restrained two restaurant operators running around 94 outlets from publicly playing music from Phonographic Performance Limited's repertoire without a license after finding a prima facie case of copyright infringement. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh, in an order pronounced on December 24, 2025, held that continued unauthorised use would cause loss to PPL and therefore warranted interim protection. Allowing two interim applications filed by PPL,...

Bombay High Court Rejects Interim Injunction Sought by Sun Pharma Against “RACIRAFT” Rival “EsiRaft”

The Bombay High Court, in an interim order, has refused to restrain Gujarat based-Meghmani Lifesciences Limited from using the trademark “EsiRaft” for its pharmaceutical product used to treat heartburn and indigestion. The court held that the mark is not deceptively similar to Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited's “RACIRAFT.”A single bench of Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh passed the order on December 23, 2025, while dismissing an interim injunction plea filed by Sun Pharmaceutical Industries...

Arbitral Award Holder Must Return Amount Withdrawn From Court After Insolvency Resolution: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that where an arbitral award passed against a company is under challenge, and the company later successfully comes out of insolvency, the award holder cannot retain money withdrawn from court deposits if the claim itself is wiped out under an approved resolution plan. The court said such amounts must be returned, as the award itself no longer survives. A single-judge bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan, in an order dated December 17, 2025, allowed an interim...

Bombay HC Restores IMAX's Enforcement Of Foreign Awards Against E-City, Holds Res Judicata Bars Re-Agitation Of Limitation At Later Stage

The Bombay High Court has recently restored enforcement proceedings initiated by IMAX Corporation for execution of foreign arbitral awards against E-City Entertainment (I) Pvt Ltd for breach of contractual obligations, holding that the doctrine of res judicata applies even between different stages of the same enforcement petition. The court said it cannot revisit an objection of limitation merely because subsequent judgments may have taken a different legal view. A Division Bench ...

Buyer Cannot Reject Goods After Putting Them To Use: Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Against Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing

The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act"), holding that once goods are put to use by the buyer, such conduct amounts to deemed acceptance under section 42 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 ("SOGA"), the buyer cannot later reject the goods on the ground of alleged defects. A claim for damages can be filed for breach of warranty but goods cannot be rejected, the court ruled. Justice Sandeep V. Marne refused ...

Bombay High Court Quashes ₹1.26 Crore Arbitral Award Over Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator

The Bombay High Court recently set aside a ₹1.26 crore arbitral award made in favor of Madhuban Motors Pvt. Ltd. on the grounds that the lender unilaterally appointed the sole arbitrator, violating Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Ruling that participation in arbitral proceedings cannot remedy an ineligible appointment, the Bench comprising of Justice Sandeep V. Marne held that the award was "patently illegal" and "against public policy". The disputed stemmed from a...