India IP Litigation
7,068 annotated decisions
Page 202 of 295 · 7,068 total
Bennett, Coleman And Company Limited. v.Global India Entertainment Production
The Bombay High Court addressed an interim application seeking a temporary injunction against the unauthorized use of 'Miss India' and 'Mr. India' by defendants organizing similar beauty pageants. The court found that while the words themselves are generic, their combination with other elements creates distinctiveness, supporting the plaintiffs' claim of trademark infringement and passing off. Although the initial relief was not granted immediately, the court allowed the defendants to propose concrete modifications to their titles for future consideration.
Mr Imran Aman Sharieff (IAS Enterprises) v.M/s Sathwika Traders; M/s Sri Tarakarama Rice Industries
The Karnataka High Court remanded an appeal concerning a dispute over trademark and copyright infringement. The appellant, Mr. Imran Aman Sharieff, sought to overturn the trial court's rejection of his application for a temporary injunction. Crucially, he introduced a new document—an order rejecting the respondents' trade mark registration application—at the appellate stage. The High Court ruled that since this new evidence was not available during the initial proceedings, it could only be used by directing the trial court to reconsider its decision based on the newly produced material.
Anand S/o Nanabhau Embadwar v.Union of India, Through Ministry of Agricultural & Farmers Welfare
This case involved a Public Interest Litigation and Writ Petition challenging the manufacturing and marketing of Soil Testing Fertilizer Recommendation (STFR) technology developed by ICAR and IARI. The petitioner, Nagarjuna Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., sought to restrain its marketing while simultaneously benefiting from the technology. The court found the litigation frivolous and vexatious.
Shyam Steel Industries Limited v.Shyam Sel And Power Limited & Anr.
This Calcutta High Court judgment addresses a trademark infringement and passing off suit filed by Shyam Steel Industries Limited against Shyam Sel And Power Limited. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were exploiting its reputation by using 'Shyam' on their TMT bar packaging, despite previous agreements to phase out the mark. However, the court noted the defendant's claim of honest adoption and the common nature of the word 'Shyam'. Consequently, the court declined to grant an immediate injunction but allowed the defendants time to file a detailed affidavit-in-opposition.
Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association v.Dijit Kumar, Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., The Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh State Excise Department
The Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association filed a civil suit against several defendants, including Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., alleging infringement and passing off of their trademarked logos such as “UB”, “SNJ”, “KALS”, “APPOLLO”, and “AM”. The plaintiffs sought damages and permanent injunctions to protect the goodwill associated with these marks. However, before the court could proceed further, the plaintiff chose to withdraw the suit.
M/s Genentech Inc. v.Drugs Controller General Of India
Genentech Inc. appealed an interim order passed by the Delhi High Court which had altered the protective conditions previously set by the Single Judge concerning the launch of the biosimilar drug 'TrastuRel' (manufactured by Reliance Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.). The dispute centered on Genentech's patent rights over the monoclonal antibody drug 'Trastuzumab'.
S.Sudhakar / Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods P Ltd. v.Priya Krishnakumar / Krishnakumar
This Madras High Court case addresses a complex dispute involving alleged infringement of registered trademarks and copyright in the food product sector. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants were using deceptively similar marks ('UDAYA MASALA' vs 'UDHAIYAM') and infringing on the artistic work/logo associated with their masala powders. While the suit sought various injunctions, damages, and accounts of profits, the judgment provided a preliminary decree addressing these claims.
Deepa Jayakumar v.A.L. Vijay
Deepa Jayakumar filed an appeal seeking an interim injunction to prevent respondents (film producers) from making, releasing, or promoting films/web series about the life of Dr. J. Jayalalitha without her consent, citing concerns over privacy and reputation. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's order.
Ferid Allani v.Union Of India & Ors
The petitioner challenged the rejection of his patent application (IN/PCT/2002/00705/DEL), which covered a method and device for accessing web information. The Patent Office rejected it under Section 3(k) as a non-patentable computer program per se, and the IPAB dismissed the appeal citing lack of technical effect. The High Court allowed the petition and directed re-examination.
M/s.Rui Boutique v.Nidhi Arora
The Bombay High Court disposed of a commercial IP suit between Rui Boutique and Nidhi Arora based on mutually agreed-upon consent terms. The settlement allowed the defendant to change her existing trademark and trade name, which the plaintiff accepted. This resolution brought an end to the litigation concerning the intellectual property dispute.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Sree Annapoorna Foods
Hindustan Unilever Limited appealed an order that allowed Sree Annapoorna Foods to amend its plaint to include a claim for rendition of accounts. The appellant argued that this amendment changed the nature of the suit and was contrary to Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the single judge's finding that the amendment did not fundamentally alter the character of the original infringement and passing off suit.
Relish Snacks Pvt Ltd. v.M/S.Virchow Biotech Pvt.
The Madras High Court dismissed the trade mark infringement suit filed by Relish Snacks Pvt Ltd. against M/S.Virchow Biotech Pvt. The court held that since the plaintiff had not obtained a registered trademark, but only pending applications, the claim for infringement was premature and lacked cause of action. Furthermore, the defendant successfully argued that neither party was the registered proprietor of their respective marks, leading to the suit's dismissal.
Shri Balaji Industrial Products Limited v.AIA Engineering Limited
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a second stay on civil suit proceedings before the Commercial Court, arguing that since they had challenged the patent's validity (IN.248740) under Section 64 of the Patents Act, the commercial court proceedings should be stayed to prevent conflicting orders. The respondent argued against this, citing legal precedents that restrict simultaneous remedies and emphasizing the petitioner's delay in challenging the patent.
Dubai Islamic Bank v.Union Of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court overturned the refusal of trademark registration for 'Dubai Islamic Bank - The Better Way To Bank'. The court found that the Senior Examiner had incorrectly applied a foreign judgment, failing to consider the composite nature of the mark (including the slogan) and established Indian legal principles. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the Registrar of Trade Marks for fresh consideration, ensuring the Petitioner's arguments regarding existing registrations and global use are properly evaluated.
Dystar Colours Distribution Gmbh v.Jay Chemical Industries Ltd
The plaintiff filed a suit seeking interim protection for infringement of a patent. The court noted that the defendant had already filed its written statement and decided to expedite the hearing process.
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s.Sri Vetrivel Traders
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited filed a civil suit against M/s.Sri Vetrivel Traders alleging trademark infringement, passing-off, and copyright violation related to edible oil products. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was using the deceptively similar mark 'Sun O Gold' on their product, mimicking the plaintiff's registered trademark 'Gold Winner' and its associated trade dress. Although the suit initially sought various permanent injunctions and damages, the parties ultimately reached a compromise.
M/s.Aarumugaa Industries Partnership Firm v.Murugan Metal
M/s.Aarumugaa Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and associated copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions, surrender of infringing stocks, and accounting of profits due to deceptive similarity in branding. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum.
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s. Murugan Metal Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging infringement and passing off related to their registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and its associated artistic label. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions, destruction of infringing materials, and accounting of profits. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum of compromise.
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging multiple infringements, including unauthorized use of the registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and its associated copyrighted artistic label. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions to stop the infringing activities and demanded surrender of stocks and accounts of profits. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum.
M/s.Aarumgaa Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s. Aarumgaa Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal and others, alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and associated copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions to stop the use of similar marks and claims for damages related to passing off. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum of compromise.
M/S Laxmi Agro Impex India v.M/S Ladli India Commodities
The Delhi High Court admitted an appeal challenging a lower court's decision regarding trademark infringement. The core issue was that the Single Judge incorrectly compared the plaintiff's mark ('A') with a new defendant mark ('C'), instead of comparing it with the original relevant mark ('B'). Recognizing this procedural error, the Chief Justice granted a stay on the challenged order, preserving the status quo until the appeal is finally disposed of.
M/s.Titan Paints & Chemicals Ltd. v.Mr. Mylsamy Ranga Ramanujam
M/s.Titan Paints & Chemicals Ltd. filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking cancellation of Design Registration No. 188332. However, during the consideration of the matter, the counsel for the Appellant submitted that the relief sought had become infructuous.
Karthikeyan And Company v.M/s.New Brilliant Publications
Karthikeyan And Company filed a civil suit against M/s.New Brilliant Publications alleging both copyright infringement and passing off related to their Tamil notes. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions, surrender of infringing copies, and damages for the unauthorized reproduction and use of their work. However, the plaintiffs subsequently moved the court seeking permission to withdraw the suit due to changes in school syllabus and the defendant discontinuing active business.
Galatea Ltd v.Diyora And Bhanderi Corporation
The suit was filed under the Patent Act, 1970, seeking permanent injunction and damages against the defendants for alleged infringement. The dispute centered on whether the defendants' applications (Exh.167 and Exh.169) requesting the court to decide objections regarding document admissibility during evidence recording could be entertained after the evidence was completed.