Design Cases

160 decisions across India

India 160

Page 6 of 6

design defendant favorable · Mar 21, 1966

The Pilot Pen Co. (India) Private Ltd. v.The Gujarat Industries Private Ltd.

Madras High Court · C.S. 70 of 1963 (and others)

The Pilot Pen Co. sued several defendants alleging unlawful infringement and piracy of its registered fountain pen clip design (No. 101410). The defendants argued that the design was common, lacked novelty, or that the suits were not maintainable. The Court found that the clip design lacked originality and was a common type, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit.
design interim order · Dec 5, 1940

Dwarkadas Dhanji Sha v.Chhotalal Ravicarandas And Co.

Bombay High Court · null

The plaintiffs claimed ownership of a registered textile design and sued for infringement. The defendants argued that the design was previously published and therefore invalid. The court addressed whether the registration certificate is conclusive proof of originality or if prior publication could be raised as a defense.
design plaintiff favorable · Jun 16, 1938

The Calico Printers Association v.Ahmed Abdul Karim Bros., Limited

Bombay High Court · null

The Calico Printers Association sued Ahmed Abdul Karim Bros., Limited for infringing their two registered textile designs through the import and sale of imitation printed goods. Although the defendants admitted to innocent infringement, they offered a settlement including payment of profits (Rs. 199). The court ultimately granted an injunction in favor of the plaintiffs and awarded damages equal to the admitted profits.
design plaintiff favorable · Mar 11, 1938

The Calico Printers Association v.Mitsubishi Shoji Kaisha Limited

Bombay High Court

The Calico Printers Association sued Mitsubishi Shoji Kaisha Limited for infringing a registered textile design. The core legal issue was whether the defendants were joint tortfeasors with an intermediary, Mustak & Co., and whether the acts constituting infringement occurred within British India. The court ultimately allowed the appeal and granted an injunction.
design plaintiff favorable · Oct 5, 1937

The Calico Printers Association v.Savani And Co.

Bombay High Court

The Calico Printers Association sued Savani And Co. for infringing their registered textile design used on saries. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants imported Japanese prints whose borders were identical to or an obvious imitation of the plaintiff's protected design. The court found in favor of the plaintiffs, granting a decree for infringement.
design plaintiff favorable · Oct 5, 1937

Calico Printers Association Ltd. v.Savani And Co.

Bombay High Court · null

The plaintiffs, registered proprietors of a textile design for printing saries, sued the defendants for importing and selling Japanese prints whose borders were identical to their registered design. The court found that the plaintiffs' design was new and original, establishing their exclusive rights in British India.
design remanded · Sep 25, 1935

The Calico Printers Association v.Gosho Kabushiki Kaisha Limited

Bombay High Court · null

The Calico Printers Association sued Gosho Kabushiki Kaisha Limited for importing and selling goods bearing a registered design that was identical to or imitated their protected design without license. The core legal issue revolved around whether the plaintiffs were bound by the statute (Indian Patents and Designs Act, II of 1911) to elect between specific remedies: account of profits, damages, or a fixed sum of Rs. 1,000.
design defendant favorable · Feb 7, 1934

Mohammad Abdul Karim v.Mahammad Yasin

Allahabad High Court · AIR1934ALL798

The plaintiff sued for injunction and damages, claiming exclusive rights over a registered brass tray design (Design No. 43516). The defendants claimed that the design lacked novelty and that the plaintiff was not the true proprietor or author of the design, having learned it from others.
design defendant favorable · Feb 7, 1934

Mohammad Abdul Karim v.Mohammad Yasin And Anr.

Allahabad High Court · AIR 1934 ALLAHABAD 798

The plaintiff sued for injunction and damages against the defendants, claiming exclusive rights over a registered brass tray design (No. 43516). The defense argued that the design was common knowledge and the plaintiff was not the true author or proprietor. The court ultimately dismissed the appeal, finding that the plaintiff failed to prove proprietary rights.
design plaintiff favorable · May 22, 1917

Ernest Otto Gammeter v.The Controller Of Patents And Designs

Calcutta High Court · 48IND. CAS.437

Gammeter appealed against the cancellation of his watch band design registration by the Controller. The core legal issues were whether the Controller had the authority to cancel the registration based on a third party's application, and whether Gammeter's design constituted a novel invention.
1 •••456
Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Protecting your design rights?

Design disputes move fast. Arctic's IP team specializes in interim relief, design invalidation, and cross-border enforcement strategies.

Speak to a specialist →