[1] Arunima Baruah, The Soft Target-Crime against Women 149 (Kilaso Books, New Delhi, 2004).

[2] Gooroodass Banerjee, The Hindu Law of Marriage and Stridhan 1879 (Wentworth Press, 2016).

[3] (2003) 8 SCC 80.

[4] (2010) 11 SCC 481.

[5] 1999 Cr L J 4398.

[6] (2009) 16 SCC 605.

[1] Shuchi Agrawal & Isha Ahlawat, ‘Minority Squeeze Outs Under Takeover Law: An Analysis’ (The RMLNLU Law Review Blog, 5 October 2021)

[2] Foss V Harbottle (1843) 67 ER 189

[3] Report of the Expert Committee on Company Law, chaired by Dr. Jamshed J. Irani, submitted to the MCA on May 31, 2005.

[4] Vasani B, Kanan V and Seal R, “Minority Squeeze-out under Our Company Law – Is It a Legislative Policy Dilemma” (Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas December 16, 2021)

[5] See Companies Act, 1956 S.395

[6] See Companies Act, 2013 S.235

[7] See Companies Act 2013 S.235(2) ; Companies Act 2013 S.235(3)

[8] Delisting is advantageous for the controllers because the company is first brought outside the purview of the securities laws applicable to listed companies (which are administered by SEBI) that enables it to implement the squeeze out through a less onerous legal regime than when the company is listed.

[9] See Companies Act 2013 S.230

[10] In the context of squeeze outs, a company may propose a scheme that permits either a controller or thecompany itself to purchase shares held by the minorities thereby effecting a squeeze out

[11] See Companies Act 2013 S.66

[12] See Companies Act 2013 S.68

[13] See Companies Act 2013 S.77

[14] In Re: Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd, MANU/DE/3902/2011

[15] See Companies Act 2013 S.100

[16] See Companies Act 2013 S.100

[17] Section 236(1) of the Act provides that in the event of an acquirer, or a person acting in concert with such acquirer, becomes a registered holder of 90% or more of the issued equity share capital of a company, or in the event of any person or group of persons becoming 90% majority or holding 90% of the issued equity share capital of a company, by virtue of an amalgamation, share exchange, conversion of securities or for any other reason

[18] 57th Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance, The Companies Bill, 2011, 15th Lok Sabha, at Pg. 73

[19] A.P State Financial Corporation V. Gar Re-Rolling Mills (1994) 2 SCC 647

[20] There are some commonalities across these jurisdictions – in particular, the more favorable treatment given to squeeze outs when they are accompanied by the approval of independent directors on the board and afavorable vote of disinterested shareholders (i.e., the minorities – sometimes called a “majority of theminority” (MoM) ratification)

[1]  Research scholar (Law), Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur University,Gorakhpur(U.P)

[2] Hormusji&Daruwala v. Distt. Local Board, MANU/SN/0048/1934

[3] SnehaMahawar, Scope of Judicial Interpretation in Arbitration, Ipleaders blog(Dec 1,2021,11:00 AM), https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-judicial-interpretation-arbitration/

[4] 1995 Supp (3) SCC 376

[5] MANU/SC/0598/2011

[6] MANU/SC/0559/2003

[7] MANU/AP/1248/2014

[8] MANU/SC/0482/2003

[9] 2003 (4) SCC 172

[10] 2006 (4) SCC 445

[11] 2007 (8) SCC 466           

[12] 2007 (2) SCC 720

[13] MANU/SC/1248/2011

[14] MANU/SC/8177/2006

[15] Section 34(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

[16] Nigel Blackaby, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, 6th edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp.569–604

[17] Arbitration Act 1996 (UK) S. 67

[18] Arbitration Act 1996 (UK) S. 69

[19] 2003 (6) SCC 675

[20] Arbitration Act 2002 (Singapore) 48

[21] Arbitration Act 2002 (Singapore) 51

[22] Federal Arbitration Act 1925 (USA) Section 11

[23] [2008] AMC 1058

[24] 2018 (3) SCC 622

[1] Property Rights of women under Hindu and Muslim Law, Legal Service India, https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-10463-property-rights-of-women-under-hindu-and-muslim-law.html, Last Visited on 4th February, 2024.

[2] Areti Krishna Kumari,  Streedhan and Mehr, SSRN Papers, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=956235, Last Visited on 6th February, 2024.

[3] Mitakshara II, IX.2

[4] Supra Note 2.

[5] Oishika Banerjee, Women’s Property under Hindu Law; An Overview, https://blog.ipleaders.in/womens-property-under-hindu-law-an-overview/, Last Visited on 10th February, 2024.

[6] Pushpalatha, Introduction To Smriti, IJHA Journal, https://www.ijha.in/assets/doc/journal/VOL-4_ISSUE-2/VOL-4_ISSUE-2_JULY-AUG_2022_10.pdf Last Visited on 14th February 2024.

[7] Streedhan and Taxation Provisions, CA Club India, https://www.caclubindia.com/articles/stridhan-and-its-taxation-under-provisions-of-it-1961-49675.asp, Last Visited on 14th February, 2024.

[8] Dowry and Stridhan , Word Press, https://aishwaryasandeep.wordpress.com/2020/05/29/dowryvsstridhan/, Last Visited on 16th February, 2024.

[9] Supra Note 5.

[10] Supra Note 2.

[11] Mehr under Muslim Law, Law octopus, https://lawctopus.com/clatalogue/clat-pg/concept-of-Mehr-under-muslim-law/, Last Visited on 18th February, 2024.

[12] Supra Note 2.

[13] Supra Note 2.

[1] polity and governance, available at:https://www.drishtiias.com/pdf/1662622315_Polity%20&%20Governance-II%20(2022).pdf (last visited: 1/5/2024)

[2] Ibid

[3] rule of law, available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/rule-of-law (last visited: 1/5/2024)

[4] Khare, Shubham Manoj, Administrative Discretion & Limitation on Administrative Discretion By Article 14 & 16 of the Indian Constitution (September 1, 2009). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1465519 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1465519

[5] State of M.P. V. Bharat Singh

[6] M.P. Jain and (Late) S.N. Jain; Principles of Administrative Law; (1986); Ed: 4th ; Pub. Bombay N.M. Tripathi Pvt. Ltd. P. 319

[7] Muskrat V. United States (1911) 219 U.S. 346, 55 L. Ed. 246, 31 S. Ct. 250

[8] ART 226 of the Indian constitution

[9] Romesh Thapper V. State of Madras A.I.R. 1950 SC 124

[10] Basappa V. Nagappa A.I.R. 1954 SC 440

[11] State of Bombay V. United Motors A.I.R. 1953 SC

[1] The Impact of AI on Illustrator Jobs: Strategies for survival. (2024, March 2). https://www.toolify.ai/ai-news/the-impact-of-ai-on-illustrator-jobs-strategies-for-survival-2531795#google_vignette

[2] The Copyright act, Section 102 (b), No 14 of 1957

[3] Lang, C. (2024, February 5). Copyright in Journalism and news reporting. Copyright Alliance. https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-journalism-news-reporting/

[4] The Copyright act, Section 13(1)(a), No 14 of 1957

[5] The Copyright act, Section 17, No 14 of 1957

[6] Copyright Act 1957, s 17; Eastern India Motion Pictures v Indian Performing Right Society (1977) 2 Supreme Court Cases 820

[7] The Copyright act, Section 2(d)(vi), No 14 of 1957

[8] Lang. C, Supra note 2

[9] The Copyright act, Section 14, No 14 of 1957

[10] The Copyright act, Section 51, No 14 of 1957

[11] The Copyright act, Section 52(1)(a), No 14 of 1957

[12] October 2023 - Volume 51, Issue 9. (2023, September 21). Issuu. https://issuu.com/knoxvillebarassociation/docs/dicta_october_2023

[13] Super Cassettes Industries Limited v. Chintamani Rao, 2012 (49) PTC 1 (Del)

[14] Stim, R. (2023b, June 30). Fair use: What is transformative? Nolo.

 https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-what-transformative.html

[15] Singh, R., National Law University, Delhi, Kumar, P., & National Law University, Delhi. (2021). Originality requirement in copyright law [Book-chapter]. In Y. Pai & National Law University, Delhi (Eds.), Intellectual Property. https://epgp.inflibnet.ac.in/epgpdata/uploads/epgp_content/S000020LA/P000846/M010214/ET/151375974214_Q1e-text.pdf

[16] Admin. (2023, August 10). Navigating Copyright Challenges in the Age of AI-Generated Content: An Uncharted Legal landscape. Areness - Law & Beyond. https://www.arenesslaw.com/navigating-copyright-challenges-in-the-age-of-ai-generated-content-an-uncharted-legal-landscape/

[17] Iplf. (2023, January 14). Applicability of de minimis in copyright infringement lawsuit. IPLF. https://www.ipandlegalfilings.com/de-minimis-copyright-infringement-where-to-draw-the-line/#:~:text=However%2C%20de%20minimis%20is%20sometimes,require%20judicial%20notice%20and%20scrutiny.

[18] Bell v. Wilmott Storage Services, LLC No. 19-55882 (9th 2021)

[19] The Copyright act, Section 52, No 14 of 1957

[20] Office, U. C. (n.d.). Copyright and Artificial intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office. https://www.copyright.gov/ai/

[21] U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence, (2023) 37 CFR Part 202, Vol. 88, 51

[22] EU copyright - EUR-Lex. (n.d.). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/eu-copyright.html

[23] Stephen Thaler v. Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (2023, UKSC 49) https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2021-0201.html

[24] Li v Liu (2022) NSWCA 67 (82), (90)

[25] Ssimon. (2024, May 8). China: A landmark court ruling on copyright protection for AI-generated works - Global Litigation News. Global Litigation News. https://globallitigationnews.bakermckenzie.com/2024/05/08/china-a-landmark-court-ruling-on-copyright-protection-for-ai-generated-works/#:~:text=Artificial%20Intelligence-,China%3A%20A%20landmark%20court%20ruling%20on,protection%20for%20AI%2Dgenerated%20works&text=Recently%2C%20a%20groundbreaking%20court%20judgment,by%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20(AI).

[26] Admin, & Admin. (2023, October 11). The Nexus between Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Act. IIPRD |https://www.iiprd.com/exploring-the-nexus-between-artificial-intelligence-and-copyright-act-1956/

[1] Hendrickx Frank, “Protection of Workers’ Personal Data: General Principles” International Labour Organization Working Papers. [available at https://webapps.ilo.org/static/english/intserv/working-papers/wp062/index.html]

[2] The case of European Human Rights Court is a best example where the rules of data protection is conceived under the concept of right to privacy. Another example is, in South Africa the right to personal data protection is considered as derivative of Constitutional Right to privacy, similar to Indian approach.

[3] Kharak Singh V/S State of U.P (AIR 1963 SC 1295) and People’s Union of Civil Liberties V/S the Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 318), and the recent Puttaswami judgement (2016)

[4] King Stubb & Kasiva – Advocates and Attorneys, “Employee Privacy Rights in India – Understanding the Legal Framework” (May 2023). [available at https://ksandk.com/labour/protecting-employee-privacy-rights-in-india/]

[5] The Information Technology Act (2010), s. 43 (a),(b) and (i): any person who either, (a) accesses a computer, computer system or computer network, (b) downloads copies, or extracts any data, computer data base or information from such computer, computer system or computer network which includes information or data held or stored in any removable storage medium; (c) steals, conceals, destroys or alters or causes any person to steal, conceal, destroy or alter any computer source code used for a computer resource; with the intent to cause harm and without the owner’s consent (or the consent of any other person who is in charge of the computer/computer system/computer network) shall be held liable and be required under this section to pay damages of not more than Rs One Crore to the person affected.

[6] The Information Technology Act (2010), s. 43A: In the event that a body corporate negligently fails to implement and maintain reasonable security practises and procedures and causes wrongful loss or wrongful gain to any person while handling sensitive personal data or information in a computer resource that it owns, controls, or operates, such body corporate shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation, which shall not exceed Rupees Five Crores.

[7] The Information Technology Act (2010), s. 66C: Anybody who uses another person's electronic signature, password, or any other unique identification feature dishonestly or fraudulently maybe punished with imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of up to INR 1,00,000 in addition to their punishment.

[8] The Information Technology Act (2010), s. 72A: If someone, including an intermediary, discloses information about another person without that person's consent or in violation of a legal contract while performing services under the terms of a legal contract, with the intent to cause or knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or wrongful gain, they may be punished with imprisonment for a term that may extend to three years or with fine extending to five lakhs or both.

[9] Sensitive Personal Data or Information (SPDI) – the organisation can collect the SPDI of workers for various reasons, which includes hiring process, record retention, employee assessments or to fulfil any other legal requirements. The confidentiality of such data should be maintained throughout the processing of data and transfer of data to third parties. The Rule 5 of IT Rules states that ‘no corporate or person acting on its behalf may collect sensitive personal data or information unless the information is used for legitimate purpose to fulfil corporate activity and collected only for specific purpose and data can be collected with the written consent of the employee which is under employee surveillance.

[10] Nir Onn, “The Complete List of Data Security Standards” (February 2023). [available at https://www.reflectiz.com/blog/data-security-standards/]

[11] Gertenbach Emily, “Protecting Employee Data: 12 Best Practices for Data Security” Development and IT, Upwork (August 2023). [available at https://www.upwork.com/resources/employee-data-protection]