Litigation Arbitration



Cairn Energy secures order from French Court to freeze Indian assets in France.
Following the dispute between India and Cairn Energy pertaining to the retrospective taxation policy, the Company has reportedly secured an order from a Paris Court, freezing certain Indian assets in France.

In December 2020, a three-member tribunal of the Permanent Court of Arbitration held in favour of Cairn energy, awarding them $ 1.2 Billion plus interest, totally amounting to $ 1.7 Billion.

Following this Award, the UK company had reportedly moved a French Court seeking enforcement. Around 20 government assets in Paris are said to have been frozen, although the Ministry of Finance has stated that it had not received any communication from the French Court regarding the same.

Read More…
Delhi High Court to have its own IP Bench – Puts IPAB issue to rest.
The Delhi High Court has, through an Office Order dated 7th July 2021 constituted its own Intellectual Property Division (IPD) on the recommendations of the committee, in light of the promulgation of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021.

Through the said ordinance, the Tribunals contained therein have been abolished, and hence the Delhi High Court formed a special committee, who recommended that a distinct IPD be created, in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, and to avoid possibility of conflicting decisions in matters relating to trademarks, patents, designs, etc.

The newly created IPD shall now deal with all matters pertaining to Intellectual Property Rights, including all Original and Appellate Proceedings, including Writ Petitions relating to IPR Disputes.

Read More…
Supreme Court refuses to interfere with Delhi Assembly’s summons to Facebook MD.
The Supreme Court refused to quash the summons issued by the Peace and Harmony Committee of the Delhi Assembly, to Facebook India Managing Director Ajit Mohan.

This follows an inquiry conducted by the Assembly, probing into Facebook’s alleged role in the Delhi Riots. In this regard, the Supreme Court has held that the Assembly, although conferred with only legislative powers, can investigate complicated social problems.

The Bench opined that Facebook’s plea was premature, as only a summons had been issued, and no coercive action was taken, however, at the same time held that the Assembly ought not to encroach into prohibited domains of law, order and criminal prosecutions.

Read More…
Government holidays should be counted while adjudicating application seeking default bail: Chattisgarh High Court
In an appeal assailing the order of subordinate court wherein the Court has rejected the application for default bail by excluding the government holidays while counting period of 60 days from arrest, the High Court of Chattisgarh set aside the Order.

While setting aside the Order, the Court held that the subordinate court is not justified in dismissing the application by holding that the prescribed days for granting default does not includes the government holidays. The Court relied upon the judgement of Supreme Court in Central Bureau of Investigation versus Nazir Ahmed Sheikh  (AIR 1996 (83) SC 2980) to conclude that (i). period of filing of the charge-sheet will run from the date of order of remand and will be completed on the next date of remand, therefore, first date of remand will be excluded, and last date of remand will be included; (ii) last day sunday or holiday will be included in computing 60 days.

Read More…
Huge relief for OYO Rooms as NCLAT permits withdrawal of Insolvency Proceedings
The Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has allowed the withdrawal of the insolvency proceedings against an OYO subsidiary filed by a Gurugram hotelier for defaulting in payments.

Previously, the National Company Law Tribunal had ordered for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution process of OYO, for defaulting on payments amounting to ₹. 16 lakhs, with the total claims being submitted to the Interim Resolution Professional amounting somewhere between ₹.160 crore and ₹.200 crore.

Even though OYO had settled the matter with the original applicant, the NCLT continued proceedings based on the claims of other creditors. Finally, the matter has been put to rest by the NCLAT, permitting withdrawal of the case, and allowing the appeal.

Read More…
Bombay High Court extended the operation of all interim orders till 12 August
A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta, Justice A.A. Sayyed, Justice  S.S. Shinde and Justice  P.B. Varale have extended the operation of all interim orders till August 12, 2021, in light of the pandemic and its effect on Court proceedings.

The Court had first taken cognizance of the matter in Suo Moto PIL No. 1 of 2021 in April, during the second wave of the pandemic, and decided to regulate proceedings, thereby taking up only urgent matters for hearing. Similar orders were passed in the months of May and June as well.

As a consequence, the Court has also kept in abeyance, all orders for eviction, dispossession or demolition passed after April 9.

Similar orders have been passed by several other High Courts, such as the High Courts of Delhi, Telangana, Karnataka, etc.

Read More…
Bombay High Court issued direction prescribing the use of A4 size paper for administrative and judicial purpose
To minimize paper consumption and consequently save the environment, the High Court of Bombay vide its circular dated 6th July and 14th July has prescribed the use of A4 size papers for filing the pleadings as well as for internal communications in relation to operation of High Court. The specifications to be followed by the applicants/petitioner/ officials are :

Superior quality A4 size paper having not less than 75 GSM with printing on both sides of the paper with Font – Times New Roman or Georgia, Font size 14 with inner margin of 5 cms and outer margin 3 cms.”

Read More…
Head Office: Nariman Point Office: Andheri Office:
116 B, Mittal Towers,
Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021, India
Tel: +91 22 40680200 +91 22 22854657/58/59
Fax: +91 22 22854660
135 & 136 B, Mittal Towers,
Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021, India
Office No. 4, 3rd Floor,
Woodrow, Veera Desai Road,
Andheri (West), Mumbai-400 053, India
Tel: +91 22 40507100
Fax: +91 22 40507105


Interns and Paralegals.


As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, we are not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By agreeing to access this website, the user acknowledges the following:

This website is meant only for providing information and does not purport to be exhaustive and updated in relation to the information contained herein. Naik Naik & Company will not be liable for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material / information provided on this website. Users are advised to seek independent legal counsel before proceeding to act on any information provided herein.