India IP Litigation
7,456 annotated decisions
Page 119 of 311 · 7,456 total
Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha v.Sharp Industries & The Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks
The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha challenging an earlier order that allowed a competitor, Sharp Industries, to register the mark 'SHARP' for pumps. Despite presenting extensive evidence regarding its global reputation and prior use of the trademark, the court upheld the original decision. The core reasons for upholding the registration were that the goods in question (pumps) were deemed dissimilar from the appellant's primary products, and crucially, the appellant failed to definitively establish that 'SHARP' was a well-known mark within India as required by the Trade Marks Act.
M/s.K.P. Namboodiri'S Ayurvedics v.Dr. S. Sajikumar
The Madras High Court disposed of the petition filed by M/s.K.P. Namboodiri'S Ayurvedics against Dr. S. Sajikumar regarding the cancellation of a registered trademark (No. 1914715). The court noted that the contesting parties had entered into a Memorandum of Compromise dated October 31, 2023. Under this settlement, both parties agreed to permit each other's trademarks to coexist in the market and subsequently withdrew all related proceedings.
M/s.Blue Heaven Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd v.BHCosmetics LLC
The Madras High Court ruled in favor of M/s. Blue Heaven Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd, granting a petition for rectification of the Trade Marks Register. The court found that the first respondent's subsequent trade mark registration was deceptively similar to the petitioner's prior and established use of 'Blue Heaven.' Given that both marks are used in relation to cosmetics and related products, the court directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to cancel and remove the impugned registration (No. 4200085) from the register.
Perfetti Van Melle S.P.A v.M.G Products / M.G Food Product
Perfetti Van Melle S.P.A filed a cancellation petition seeking rectification of a specific copyright registration (A-79261/2007) held by M.G. Products. The court examined the matter in light of a prior civil suit that had been decreed based on a settlement agreement dated October 31, 2012. This settlement explicitly included the Respondent's agreement to cancel the impugned copyright registration. Consequently, the Delhi High Court directed the cancellation and expungement of the registration from the Register of Copyrights.
Nripendra Kashyap, Constituted Attorney Of Blackberry Limited v.The Assistant Controller of Patents
The appellant, Blackberry Limited, challenged the refusal of its Indian Patent Application No. 8984/CHENP/2012 by the Assistant Controller. The rejection was based on lack of inventive step and anticipation by prior art documents D1-D4. The High Court set aside the impugned order, finding that the Assistant Controller failed to address key submissions made by the appellant regarding the technical differences between the invention and the cited prior art.
Blackberry Limited v.Controller Of Patents And Designs
Blackberry Limited appealed the rejection of its patent application (1519/DELNP/2005) by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Designs. The appeal was ultimately disposed of by the Delhi High Court because the life term of the patent application had expired during the pendency of the appeal.
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ag v.The Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ag filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) challenging an earlier decision by the Controller of Patents and Designs concerning Patent No. 207232. The appellant subsequently instructed counsel to withdraw the appeal due to the expiry of the patent term.
M/S Shree Rathnam Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. v.M/S Vrindavan Foods And Anr
M/S Shree Rathnam Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. filed a contempt petition against M/S Vrindavan Foods And Anr alleging violation of a prior court order dated March 6, 2023. The original order had restrained the respondents from operating under the 'SHREE RATHNAM' brand or utilizing the petitioner's trade secrets and confidential data. After hearing the arguments, the Delhi High Court disposed of the contempt petition, accepting the defense that the respondents had complied with the judgment in letter, spirit, and intent.
Biotron Limited v.The Controller General Of Patents & Designs & Anr
Biotron Limited appealed a rejection of its patent application concerning novel antiviral compounds. The initial rejection was based on lack of inventive steps, insufficient disclosure, and non-patentability under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970. The High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
Mhg Ip Holding (Singapore) Pte. Ltd v.Anantara Greens & Ors
This Delhi High Court order marks the initial procedural steps in a trademark infringement suit filed by MHG IP Holding against Anantara Greens. The court registered the plaint and set out the schedule for pleadings, while simultaneously addressing several interlocutory applications. Key decisions included condoning the plaintiff's delay in refiling the suit and granting exemptions necessary to proceed with the claim of continuing trademark infringement.
Lupin Limited v.Tablets (India) Limited
The Madras High Court set aside an earlier rejection order in favor of Lupin Limited, allowing its appeal against the registration of the mark 'CEFTRIL'. The court found that the Registrar's conclusion—that Lupin did not use its prior mark 'CEFF'—was erroneous and contradicted the evidence presented. Furthermore, given the 1st respondent's willingness to seek cancellation, the High Court directed the removal of the disputed trade mark from the register.
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ag v.The Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ag filed an appeal challenging an order passed by The Controller of Patents and Designs regarding Patent No. 208718. However, the petitioner subsequently informed the court that the patent had expired on October 1, 2019.
Bennett, Coleman And Company Limited v.E1 Entertainment Television , Llc Anr
The Delhi High Court allowed the respondent's applications seeking to introduce a specific YouTube video into the rectification proceedings. The respondent argued that this video was crucial evidence supporting their claim of continuous use of the mark since the early 1990s, which directly counters the petitioner's request for trademark cancellation/rectification. The court ruled that since the link had been previously cited in the written statement, the video clip was not an 'additional document,' thereby allowing its admission to ensure a fair trial.
Laurus Labs Pvt Ltd v.H.Lundbeck A/S
Laurus Labs Pvt Ltd filed a Transfer Original Petition seeking the revocation of Indian patent No. 229919 held by H. Lundbeck A/S under Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970. The court observed that the term of the said patent had already expired on July 12, 2021.
Sucampo Pharma Llc v.M/s.Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India
Sucampo Pharma LLC filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) challenging an earlier order issued by the Assistant Controller of Patents. The appeal sought to set aside the 2016 order and allow the patent application to proceed for grant.
M/s.Biodelivery Sciences International, Inc. v.M/s.Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India, Patent Office
M/s.Biodelivery Sciences International, Inc. filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) challenging an earlier order from the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs. The appellant subsequently instructed their counsel to withdraw the appeal.
Compagnie De Saint-Gobain v.Sakthi Sai Safety Glass India
Compagnie De Saint-Gobain filed applications alleging that Sakthi Sai Safety Glass India was continuing to use the protected Trade Mark 'SAINT-GOBAIN' for selling toughened glasses after their contract had been terminated. The respondents raised defenses regarding lack of compliance with mediation, contractual relationship, and arbitration clauses.
M/S Sachdeva And Sons Industries Ppvt Ltd v.M/S Jivan Ram And Sons
This matter involved a rectification petition filed by M/S Sachdeva And Sons Industries Ppvt Ltd against the Copyright registration held by M/S Jivan Ram And Sons for an artistic work titled 'PYARI'. The petitioner sought to challenge this copyright based on its own registered Trademark, 'PARI'. However, due to repeated failures of the Petitioner to appear in court and difficulties in serving notices, the Delhi High Court ultimately dismissed the rectification petition for non-prosecution.
Mr Archit Lohia & Ors. v.Ons Mechcon Project Private Limited & Anr.
The plaintiffs filed a suit alleging that the defendants' product, 'Alumina Ceramic Adjustable Line Orifice', infringes upon their Indian Patent IN355705 concerning a variable orifice for regulating mass transport. The court registered the plaint and issued orders regarding pleadings, interim injunctions, and exemption from pre-institution mediation.
Exide Industries Ltd / Chloride Group Limited v.Vertiv Company Group Limited / R.G. Kapadia & Others
The Delhi High Court decreed two consolidated suits concerning the trademark 'CHLORIDE' after the parties reached a comprehensive settlement. The dispute involved Exide Industries Ltd (and Chloride Group Limited) against Vertiv Company Group Limited regarding the unauthorized use of the mark on UPS products. Under the terms of the settlement, Vertiv agreed not to use the 'CHLORIDE' trademark or its variants directly or indirectly, effectively resolving the long-standing infringement claims.
ITC Limited v.Godfrey Phillips India Limited & Anr
ITC Limited filed a Rectification Petition seeking the removal of the 'SUN FLAKE' trademark registration held by Godfrey Phillips India Limited. The petition, which also involved striking off certain paragraphs and documents from affidavits, was listed before the Delhi High Court on November 10, 2023. The court accepted notice and scheduled the matter for further hearing on November 21, 2023.
Cabot Corporation v.The Registrar of Trade Marks
Cabot Corporation successfully challenged the refusal of its word mark 'PROPEL' by The Registrar of Trade Marks. The High Court overturned the rejection based on two cited marks. For the first mark, the court noted that the proprietor had subsequently consented to registration despite differences in goods. For the second composite mark, the court clarified that protection only extends to the entire composite device and not its individual elements unless separately registered. This ruling paves the way for 'PROPEL' to proceed toward trademark registration.
Centaur Pharmaceuticals Private Limited v.Sai Mirra Innopharm Private Limited; The Registrar of Trade Marks
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by Centaur Pharmaceuticals seeking the rectification or removal of Trade Mark No. 1409666 from the register. The court found that the trade mark's last valid registration expired long ago, specifically on December 28, 2015. Since the renewal period had lapsed and the petition was based on rectifying an active registration, the court held the case to be infructuous.
Rxprism Health Systems Private Limited v.Canva Pty Ltd & Ors
The Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants' product infringes their patent titled 'A system and a method for creating and sharing interactive content rapidly anywhere and anytime'. The Defendants were previously restrained from making the product available in the market.