Tag: Section 188
November 28, 2019
Corporate Law | General Corporate Advisory
Corporate Law | General Corporate Advisory
Related Party Transactions: How Close is too Close?
Related party transactions have once again found themselves the subject of public scrutiny due to occurrences at InterGlobe Aviation Limited ("Interglobe"), which runs and operates the low-cost airline Indigo. Interglobe has been facing stormy weather following a dispute between its promoters, Rakesh Gangwal and Rahul Bhatia. Since mid-2018 the feud between both promoters has snowballed into a very public feud. While there are several contentious issues on which the promoters disagree, one of the main reasons for their public fallout has been over related party transactions. In 2018, Rakesh Gangwal flagged and alleged that Interglobe has entered into related party transactions with several companies associated with Rahul Bhatia, a charge that the latter insists is mala fide. ...
Revised ECB Framework: Borrowing From Tomorrow
The Reserve Bank of India (the “RBI”) has amended the Foreign Exchange Management (Borrowing and Lending) Regulations, 2018 through the Foreign Exchange Management ...
Startup India 2.0: A Deep Tech Reset
The Indian government has updated the definition, eligibility criteria, recognition process, and compliance framework for startups, and introduced a new category ...
Limits of Director Liability: The Supreme Court on Piercing the Corporate Veil during Exec...
The corporate veil acts as a legal metaphor for the protective barrier that separates a company's obligations and liabilities from the personal assets of the individuals ...
Riyadh Ready: Harmonising India’s Design laws with Global Standards
Following India becoming a signatory to the Riyadh Design Law Treaty (“DLT”), discussed here, the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has released ...
The Hirotsu decision: India tightens the screws on diagnostic patents
The law on the patentability of diagnostic methods in India is very clear: they are not patentable under Section 3(i) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970. Over the last few years, the jurisprudence surrounding this exception to ...
India’s New Deepfake Regulation: MeitY Notifies Amendments to Information Technology...
On February 10, 2026, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology ("MeitY") notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics ...
The Registrar’s “Undo” Button: The Lambretta case and Section 19 of India’s Trademark Act
Trademark disputes rarely move in straight lines. Sometimes, well before a mark becomes opposition-worthy, disputes around ownership may emerge.
Data Protection as a Closing Condition: Rethinking Risk Allocation in Indian Tech Deals
Data protection has historically been considered a compliance issue during transactions, which is generally identified during diligence and only tackled after closing ...
Limits of Claim Construction: Preamble vs. Characterising Clauses in Indian Patent Dispute...
Claim construction is an important aspect of infringement analysis. In several jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, and the European Union...
Urgency in IP Suits: No more Pre-Institution Mediation Hurdles in India?
In a jurisdiction beset by large volumes of litigation, litigating parties must naturally be encouraged to explore alternate means of dispute resolution.
English
Chinese (Simplified)
Japanese