We are a family of strong 800+ people including 470+ professionals working from 14 locations across India.
We have a rich heritage and enduring legacy which are pivotal in shaping trust, excellence, and unparalleled legal expertise, thus building a strong reputation and a trusted brand.
We started in 1985 in a single room set up by the two founders with no prior experience of working in a law firm. Both the founders had outstanding academic records and focused on their deep understanding of the law to form the foundation of the firm.
Integrity, Knowledge and Passion are the principles that resonate with every member of our LKS family and the work that we do. These values drive us to build a community of legally sound professionals and well-serviced clients.
Everything we have accomplished over the last four decades is a result of our unique way of thinking which is deeply influenced by our core values and principles that define us.
We and our professionals consistently garner appreciation for the quality of our services and the depth of our legal expertise. This consistent acknowledgment serves as a testament to our unwavering commitment to exceed expectations.
Right to paternity of contribution in cinematographic film – Analysis of the CHHAPAK case
By Saksham Garg
The Delhi High Court recently held that once a person has contributed to any cinematographic film in any manner, then as per the moral rights, he/ she has right to paternity. The Single Judge upheld an order of the Trial Court granting mandatory interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff. The Court applied the maxim of promissory estoppel in favour of the Plaintiff to hold that a valid expectation was created in the Plaintiff’s favour of having her work in the film recognized in the credits sequence. The Court also observed that there was no monetary benefit, or any other kind taken by the Plaintiff in lieu of her services and thus deserved the right to acknowledgement. Elaborately discussing contentions of the parties before the Court and its findings, the author concludes that the contributor has paternity right under the moral rights allotted to a person under Section 57 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The author is of the view that an effective remedy can be provided in such cases by applying the principle of promissory estoppel and granting a mandatory injunction to the effect of acknowledging such contribution...
Ratio decidendi
Patents – Cobicistat is not a derivative of Ritonavir – Differences in structure – Controller of Patents, New Delhi
Patents and design – Right to file infringement suit not affected during pendency of post-grant opposition – Delhi High Court
Copyrights over musical works – Rights of Producer and not Composer of work – Madras High Court
Trademarks – No abandonment of mark by non-renewal of registration – Bombay High Court
Trademarks – Use of mark “Isetan Tartan” on non-Scotch whisky is sufficiently deceptive as to product’s geographical origin – High Court of Republic of Singapore
Trademarks – Amendment to plaint for passing off after registration of mark post filing of suit – Calcutta High Court
News Nuggets
“Andaman Bigg Boss” deceptively similar to mark “Bigg Boss”
Territorial jurisdiction – Apprehension of future activity within jurisdiction of Court
GI mark for ‘Basmati’ rice – Inclusion of certain areas of Madhya Pradesh
Inspection of documents – Confidentiality club – External expert not mandatory
Purpose of IPAB completely set at naught: Delhi High Court
