<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (3) TMI 773 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197052</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the application for injunction, ruling that the Defendant&#039;s TV commercial did not disparage the Plaintiff&#039;s product. The Defendant was permitted to broadcast the commercial after removing the reference to the two-year period. The injunction was lifted, and both parties&#039; applications were resolved without costs. The court clarified that its findings were limited to the applications and would not bind the parties in the trial of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501018" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 773 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197052</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the application for injunction, ruling that the Defendant&#039;s TV commercial did not disparage the Plaintiff&#039;s product. The Defendant was permitted to broadcast the commercial after removing the reference to the two-year period. The injunction was lifted, and both parties&#039; applications were resolved without costs. The court clarified that its findings were limited to the applications and would not bind the parties in the trial of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197052</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>