India IP Litigation

7,068 annotated decisions

7,068
Decisions
4
IP Types
10
Courts

Page 17 of 295 · 7,068 total

patent plaintiff favorable · Oct 24, 2025

M/s Prominal Electric Vehicle Private Limited v.The State of West Bengal

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) · WPA No.21879 of 2025

Petitioners, e-rickshaw manufacturers, challenged the non-issuance of registration certificates due to concerns about patent holder's exclusive rights. The Court reviewed previous orders and directed the Registering Authority to proceed with registrations, provided the vehicles are distinct from those subject to a pending title suit.

patent plaintiff favorable · Oct 24, 2025

M/S Sunhok Wheels Pvt. Ltd. v.The State Of West Bengal

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) · WPA No.22027 of 2025

Petitioners, manufacturers of e-rickshaws, challenged the non-issuance of registration certificates due to concerns raised by a private respondent claiming patent rights over the technology. The court reviewed previous orders and directed the Registering Authority to proceed with registrations, provided the vehicles are distinct from those subject to pending title suits.

trademark dismissed · Oct 22, 2025

Sri Narasu's Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. v.M/S.Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd.

Madras High Court · OP(TM) No. 49 of 2025

The Madras High Court dismissed the trademark rectification petition filed by Sri Narasu's Coffee Company against M/S.Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. The dispute, which sought to cancel the 'Udhaiyam' trademark registration in Class 30, was resolved amicably between the parties. Both sides entered into a Memorandum of Compromise, leading the petitioner to withdraw the original petition.

trademark settled · Oct 22, 2025

Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt.Ltd v.S.Sudhakar

Madras High Court · OP(TM) No. 45 of 2025

The Madras High Court dismissed the trademark rectification petition filed by Sri Narasu's Coffee Company Pvt.Ltd against S.Sudhakar and others. The dismissal was not a ruling on the merits but rather an acceptance of a Memorandum of Compromise signed between the parties. This settlement effectively resolved the dispute regarding the 'Udhaiyam' trademark registration in Class 30.

trademark dismissed · Oct 22, 2025

M/s.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. v.S.Giriedharan and others (Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods)

Madras High Court · OP(TM) No. 50 of 2025

The Madras High Court dismissed OP(TM) No. 50 of 2025 after the parties entered into a Memorandum of Compromise. The petitioner, M/s.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd., had sought the cancellation and rectification of the trademark 'Udhaiyam' registered by the respondents in Class 30. Given the mutual agreement reached between the parties, the court allowed the petition to be withdrawn.

trademark settled · Oct 22, 2025

Rep. By Its Managing Director v.Sri Narasus Coffee Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Madras High Court · C.S(COMM DIV) NO. 203 OF 2024 & OP(TM) No. 62 of 2024

The Madras High Court addressed a trademark infringement suit (C.S(COMM DIV) NO. 203 OF 2024) and an opposition petition (OP(TM) No. 62 of 2024) concerning the mark 'UDHAIYAM' versus 'UDHAYAM'. Both parties reached a Memorandum of Compromise on October 10, 2025. Consequently, the Court dismissed both petitions as withdrawn, concluding the litigation without a final judgment on the merits.

trademark dismissed · Oct 22, 2025

M/s.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. v.S.Sudhakar and S.Dinakar (Partners of M/s.Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods)

Madras High Court · OP(TM) No. 54 of 2025

M/s.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. filed a petition seeking the cancellation and rectification of the trademark 'Udhaiyam,' registered by S.Sudhakar and S.Dinakar under Application No.1359360 in Class 30. However, both parties subsequently entered into a Memorandum of Compromise. Consequently, the Madras High Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn, allowing the dispute to be resolved amicably between the involved parties.

trademark dismissed · Oct 22, 2025

M/S.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt. v.M/S.Shri Lakshmi Agro Agencies & The Registrar of Trademarks

Madras High Court · OP(TM) No. 44 of 2025

The Madras High Court dismissed the rectification petition filed by M/S.Sri Narasu's Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. against M/S.Shri Lakshmi Agro Agencies. The petitioner had sought to cancel the trademark registration 'Udhaiyam' in Class 30, citing grounds for invalidity. However, both parties subsequently entered into a Memorandum of Compromise and filed an additional joint memo requesting withdrawal. Consequently, the court accepted the request and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.

trademark settled · Oct 22, 2025

M/s.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt.Ltd. v.S.Sudhakar and S.Dinakar (Partners of M/s.Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods)

Madras High Court · OP(TM) No. 57 of 2025

M/s.Sri Narasu'S Coffee Company Pvt.Ltd. had filed a petition seeking the rectification and cancellation of the trademark 'Udhaiyam,' registered by S.Sudhakar and S.Dinakar under Application No.1359359 in Class 29. However, both parties subsequently entered into a Memorandum of Compromise dated October 10, 2025. Consequently, the Madras High Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn, resolving the dispute amicably.

patent pending · Oct 17, 2025

Panoptis Patent Management Llc v.Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1136/2025

Panoptis Patent Management LLC filed a suit against Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd., asserting infringement of its Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) related to 3G, 4G, and 5G cellular standards. The court allowed various interlocutory applications, including those seeking leave to amend claims and file documents, while directing the parties to proceed with pleadings and listing for injunction hearing.

patent plaintiff favorable · Oct 17, 2025

Atomberg Technologies Private Limited v.Eureka Forbes Limited

Supreme Court of India · TRANSFER PETITION (C) NO(S). 1983 OF 2025

Atomberg Technologies filed a suit in Bombay against Eureka Forbes regarding groundless threats of patent infringement. Eureka Forbes subsequently filed an infringement suit in Delhi, alleging that Atomberg's 'Atomberg Intellon' water purifier infringed their patented technologies. The Supreme Court addressed the competing transfer petitions to consolidate the proceedings.

patent pending · Oct 17, 2025

Celligence International Llc v.Deputy Controller Of Patents And Designs

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 47/2025

Celligence International Llc filed an appeal against an order dated 30.06.2025 issued by the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs regarding Indian patent application no. 202117058456. The court issued notice to the respondent, directing them to file a reply within four weeks.

trademark mixed · Oct 17, 2025

Krbl Limited v.Shailendra Chaturvedi & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 33/2025

The Delhi High Court disposed of the appeal in Krbl Limited vs Shailendra Chaturvedi & Anr., resolving a dispute over the scope of the trademark 'DOON MEMORIES'. The court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to amend the registration (TM No. 421683) to restrict the goods exclusively to bakery products, based on an undertaking given by Respondent No. 1. This decision effectively narrowed the scope of the mark's use, provided the respondent adheres strictly to the agreed-upon limitations.

trademark plaintiff favorable · Oct 17, 2025

Abbott Laboratories v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 31/2025

The Delhi High Court allowed Abbott Laboratories to appeal the rejection of its 'ENSURE' trademark application. The original rejection was based on insufficient evidence supporting a very early claimed date of use (31.12.1999). The court granted liberty for the Appellant to amend its user claim, restricting it to 23.04.2012, and directed the Registrar to reconsider the application afresh. This decision effectively restored the trademark application to its original status.

trademark plaintiff favorable · Oct 17, 2025

Esme Consumers Pvt Ltd v.Suraj Collection And Anr

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1142/2025

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Esme Consumers Pvt Ltd against Suraj Collection And Anr, finding a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off. The court determined that the defendant's use of similar marks and trade dress was calculated to deceive consumers and erode the plaintiff's established goodwill associated with its cosmetic products. Consequently, the defendants were immediately restrained from using the infringing marks until the final hearing.

trademark mixed · Oct 17, 2025

Kbm Foods Private Limited v.Ajay Yadav Trading As Sourav Masala Company

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1141/2025

The Delhi High Court issued a comprehensive order in the trademark infringement suit filed by Kbm Foods Private Limited against Ajay Yadav Trading As Sourav Masala Company. The court granted several procedural exemptions, including waiving pre-institution mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court directed the appointment and execution of a Local Commissioner to seize goods bearing allegedly infringing marks, thereby providing immediate interim relief to the plaintiff while the main suit proceeds.

trademark mixed · Oct 17, 2025

Pureplay Skin Sciences (India) Pvt. Ltd. v.Mr. Wazahat Choudhary

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1139/2025

In a trademark infringement suit concerning skincare products, the Delhi High Court issued several procedural orders favoring the Plaintiff, Pureplay Skin Sciences. The court granted leave to file additional documents and exempted the plaintiff from mandatory pre-litigation mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court also allowed the appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the defendant's premises for potential counterfeit goods, while simultaneously granting exemptions regarding advance service and discovery procedures.

trademark plaintiff favorable · Oct 17, 2025

The Indian Hotels Company Limited v.Vivanta Stays & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1109/2025

The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of The Indian Hotels Company Limited against Vivanta Stays & Ors. The court recognized 'VIVANTA' as a well-known trademark and immediately restrained the defendants from using similar marks, such as VIVANTA STAYS/VIVANTA REALTY, both online and offline. Furthermore, the order mandated the immediate takedown of infringing websites and domain names, providing swift protection to the plaintiff's brand reputation.

trademark mixed · Oct 17, 2025

Lifestyle Equities C.V. v.Dilipkumar Narandas Sheth Trading As M/s. Arihant Enterprise

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 829/2025

In this ongoing trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court addressed several interlocutory applications. The court allowed the defendant to file vernacular and dim documents while simultaneously directing both parties to engage in an amicable resolution. Crucially, the court acknowledged evidence presented by the defendant regarding the historical use of a specific logo as a watermark on invoices dating back to 1993, allowing the plaintiff to inspect these original documents. The judgment emphasizes the possibility of settlement before further litigation proceeds.

trademark settled · Oct 17, 2025

Grasim Industries Limited & Anr. v.Mridula Kumari Trading As M/S Superior Birla Rock And Co.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 19/2025

Grasim Industries Limited successfully settled its trademark infringement suit against Mridula Kumari Trading As M/S Superior Birla Rock And Co. The parties reached an amicable agreement where the defendant formally recognized the plaintiffs' exclusive proprietary rights in trademarks like BIRLA and BIRLA WHITE, trade dress, and packaging. Crucially, the settlement mandates that the defendant cease using any confusingly similar marks or trade names, change her business name, and refrain from online misuse of the protected brands. The court decreed the suit based on these comprehensive settlement terms.

patent pending · Oct 16, 2025

Ynsect v.The Controller Of Patents

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 46/2025, I.A. 25867/2025 & I.A. 25868/2025

Ynsect filed an appeal under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970, challenging a previous order issued by The Controller of Patents regarding Indian Patent Application No. 201917024125. The court issued notice and directed both parties to file their respective replies and rejoinders.

copyright interim order · Oct 16, 2025

Dassault Systemes Solidworks Corporation & Anr. v.Mr. Shashikant Sharma & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1124/2025

The Plaintiffs, owners of the SOLIDWORKS software copyright, filed a suit seeking permanent injunction for infringement. The court passed several orders, including granting an ex parte ad-interim injunction and appointing a Local Commissioner to inspect the defendants' systems.

trademark mixed · Oct 16, 2025

Darzi India Llp v.Kafil Ahmed

Delhi High Court - Orders · CONT.CAS(C) 1559/2025 & CM APPL. 65624/2025

This Delhi High Court order addresses a contempt petition filed by Darzi India Llp against Kafil Ahmed for alleged violation of a prior court decree. The core dispute revolves around the permissible use of the trade mark 'KAFIL DARZI'. While the petitioner sought strict enforcement and removal of infringing marks, the respondent argued that the previous judgment permitted the usage. Consequently, the Court allowed the respondent liberty to seek clarification from the Single Judge regarding the scope of the prior order.

trademark plaintiff favorable · Oct 16, 2025

YC Electric Vehicle v.Iqbal Proprietor Of M/S K.G.N & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 1114/2025

The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of YC Electric Vehicle against Iqbal Proprietor Of M/S K.G.N & Anr., addressing claims of trademark and copyright infringement related to the 'YATRI' brand used for electric vehicles. The court recognized the Plaintiff's status as a prior user and owner, issuing a broad restraint order preventing Defendants from using deceptively similar marks online or offline. This interim relief is crucial for protecting the market reputation and goodwill associated with the Plaintiff's established e-vehicle brand.

1 •••161718•••295