India IP Litigation
7,177 annotated decisions
Page 124 of 300 · 7,177 total
Novartis AG v.Sun Pharmaceuticals Limited
Novartis AG filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking to set aside an earlier order and allow its patent application (No. IN/PCT/2001/00016/CHE) to proceed to grant. However, the appellant failed to note that Patent No. 223313 had already expired on May 16, 2023. Consequently, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeal as infructuous.
Upl Limited v.Basf Se
UPL Limited filed an Original Petition (Patent) seeking the revocation of Patent No. 262428 against Basf Se and The Controller of Patents. However, the petitioner subsequently instructed their counsel to withdraw the petition.
Novartis AG v.Asst.Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India
Novartis AG filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging an order passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs regarding a Post Grant Opposition to Patent No. 237273. The appeal was subsequently withdrawn by the appellant.
India Nippon Electricals Limited v.M/s. Denso Corporation
India Nippon Electricals Limited filed an Original Petition seeking the revocation of Indian Patent 240996 granted by the Controller of Patents. However, the petitioner's counsel subsequently instructed to withdraw the petition.
ITC Limited v.Britannia Industries Ltd.
ITC Limited filed a suit against Britannia Industries Ltd. alleging imitation of its trade dress for biscuits. The defendant sought to reject the plaint on grounds including lack of urgency, failure to comply with pre-mediation requirements, and jurisdictional challenges. The Madras High Court dismissed the application to reject the plaint, finding that the plaintiff had established jurisdiction and that the case warranted consideration despite procedural objections.
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited v.The Controller of Patents and Designs
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging an earlier decision by the Controller of Patents and Designs concerning Patent No. 224855. However, both parties submitted that the term of Patent No. 224855 had already ceased on October 14, 2019.
Fisher And Paykel Healthcare Limited v.The Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr.
Fisher And Paykel Healthcare Limited challenged a First Examination Report that deemed its Divisional Application No. 202118034146 defective. The Controller of Patents had issued an order based on Section 59 of the Patents Act, 2000. During the hearing, the respondent acknowledged the error and agreed to set aside the impugned order.
Abbvie Deutschland GmbH & Co Kg v.Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India, Patent Office
Abbvie Deutschland GmbH & Co Kg filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) challenging an earlier decision made by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. The appeal sought to allow Application No. 2420/CHENP/2009 for patent grant. However, the appellant subsequently withdrew the appeal.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) v.Competition Commission Of India & Anr.
This judgment addresses whether the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has the authority to investigate a patent holder's conduct under the Competition Act, 2002. The court held that while both statutes deal with anti-competitive behavior, the specific legislative intent and subject matter dictate that the Patents Act, particularly Chapter XVI, governs patent rights, limiting CCI's power.
Indian Institute of Technology Madras v.The Controller of Patents and Designs
The Indian Institute of Technology Madras filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging an order passed by The Controller of Patents and Designs regarding the renewal application for its Patent No. 2007637. However, the appellant subsequently instructed counsel to withdraw the appeal.
Oracle International Corporation v.Controller Of Patents
Oracle International Corporation filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the Controller of Patents' order regarding the patentability of its application (3566/CHENP/2006). The appeal argued that the subject matter was eligible for patent protection and not excluded as a business method or computer program per se. However, the appellant subsequently withdrew the appeal.
Sucampo AG v.Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India
Sucampo AG filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) challenging the revocation of Patent No. 223147 by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. The appellant subsequently submitted a memo requesting the withdrawal of the appeal.
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v.The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) seeking to set aside an impugned order and grant a patent on Indian Patent Application No. 5162/CHENP/2010. The appellant subsequently instructed counsel to withdraw the appeal.
Universidad De Nvarra v.Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India
Universidad De Nvarra filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) seeking to overturn previous orders and allow its patent application No.4387/CHENP/2006 to proceed to grant. However, the appellant subsequently submitted a memo requesting the withdrawal of the appeal.
Oracle International Corporation v.The Controller of Patents
Oracle International Corporation filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the refusal of its patent application (No. 3740/CHENP/2006) by the Assistant Controller of Patents. The appeal was subsequently withdrawn by the appellant.
Novartis AG v.Cipla Limited
Novartis AG filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (Patents) challenging the decision of the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs regarding Patent Application No. 593/CHE/2005. The appellant subsequently instructed its counsel to withdraw the appeal.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Jeetu Shivlani
The Commercial IPR Suit between Hindustan Unilever Ltd. and Jeetu Shivlani was settled out of court. The parties executed Consent Terms on the date of judgment, leading to the disposal and decreeing of the suit.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Jeetu Shivlani
The Commercial IPR Suit between Hindustan Unilever Ltd. and Jeetu Shivlani was settled on July 12, 2023. The parties executed Consent Terms, leading to the suit being disposed of and decreed in favor of the Plaintiff.
United Foods Public Company Limited v.The Registrar of Trademarks
United Foods Public Company Limited filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the Registrar of Trademarks' refusal to register the mark 'YOYO' in Class 30. The appeal sought to set aside the refusal and allow the trademark application to proceed. However, before the court could rule on the merits of the case, the appellant voluntarily moved for withdrawal. Consequently, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
Amgen Inc v.The Registrar of Trademarks
Amgen Inc filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the Registrar of Trademarks' refusal to register the mark 'SILIQ' in Class 5. The appeal sought to set aside the previous order and allow the trademark registration to proceed. However, before the court could rule on the merits of the case, Amgen Inc submitted a memo requesting the withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
Walgreen Co. v.The Registrar of Trademarks
Walgreen Co. filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the Registrar of Trademarks' refusal to register the mark 'Finest Nutrition' in Class 5. However, before the court could rule on the merits of the appeal, the appellant voluntarily submitted a memo requesting its withdrawal. Consequently, the Madras High Court dismissed the case as withdrawn without passing any order regarding costs.
M/s.United Spirits Limited v.Wipro Limited
The Madras High Court dismissed the Original Petition filed by M/s.United Spirits Limited against Wipro Limited. The petition sought to rectify the trademark register by cancelling the registration of 'ARAMUSK-BOLD' held by Wipro. However, the petitioner subsequently withdrew the case following a compromise reached in a connected suit, leading to the dismissal of this rectification petition without any order as to costs.
Multiplex Farming Rep By Mr. v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks
The Madras High Court addressed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by Multiplex Farming challenging an earlier rejection order regarding its trademark application for 'MULTIPLEX FARMING' in Class 44. However, the appellant chose to withdraw the appeal before the court could rule on the merits of the case. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn without making any substantive orders.
Aasife Biriyani Pvt Ltd v.Greens Lands Restaurant
Aasife Biriyani Pvt Ltd filed a lawsuit against Greens Lands Restaurant, alleging infringement of its registered trademark (No. 3768877) and associated copyrights in relation to providing food services. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions and damages for passing off and unauthorized use of the brand. However, during the proceedings, the parties reached an out-of-court settlement.