India: Court Procedure

Velusamy Karuppannan (the ‘Informant’), a software professional, alleged before the CCI that AVEVA Group Limited and its Indian subsidiaries (collectively, ‘AVEVA’) contravened Sections 3(4) and 4 of the Act by abusing its dominant position in the market for industrial automation software (Manufacturing Execution Systems (‘MES’), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (‘SCADA’), and Historian) through: (i) coercing customers into the AVEVA Flex Subscription model and hiding perpetual licenses, driving higher prices and minimum credit commitments...

When a foreign court judgment declares a joint venture agreement void, does it automatically terminate an international arbitration seated elsewhere? This analysis examines how domestic rulings interact with arbitral proceedings, exploring the jurisdictional boundaries between local courts and arbitral tribunals and the strategic risks companies face when navigating parallel proceedings.

The Supreme Court of India reaffirmed the constitutional principle that judicial intervention must not disrupt ongoing electoral processes, dismissing a writ petition challenging the rejection of a Rajya Sabha nomination. The judgment reinforces that election-related disputes can only be challenged through election petitions after the electoral process concludes, maintaining the balance between judicial review and electoral continuity under Article 329(b) of the Constitution.