Bombay High Court
667 cases · page 10 of 23
Showing 271–299Franco-Indian Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd v.Nutramarck Lifesciences Pvt Ltd
This interim application was filed regarding a trademark dispute between Franco-Indian Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd and Nutramarck Lifesciences Pvt Ltd. The defendant, through its director Mr Abhinav, stated that they had stopped manufacturing products with the impugned mark IMMULIV and would remove them from e-commerce websites within two weeks.
Franco-Indian Remedies Pvt Ltd v.Unihelix Biotech Pvt Ltd
The Plaintiff filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off regarding its mark FINATE used in cholesterol control formulations. The Defendant was using the mark FERINATE XT. The Court found a prima facie case due to the confusing similarity between the marks, leading to an interim injunction favoring the Plaintiff.
Fdc Limited v.Shripal Mangalchand Jain
Fdc Limited filed a Commercial IP Suit against Shripal Mangalchand Jain regarding trademark infringement. The dispute centers on FDC's mark PYRIMON (used for anti-bacterial isolation) versus the Defendant's mark PRIMON-N (used for birth control pills and menopausal hormone therapy).
Ajanta Pharma Limited v.Uniray Life Sciences
Ajanta Pharma Limited filed an interim application alleging that Uniray Life Sciences was using the competing mark ACNO GEL, which infringed upon Ajanta's registered trademarks (ACNO and ACNO-C) used for acne treatment. The court found a sufficient prima facie case and granted an ad-interim injunction.
Laboratories Griffon Pvt Ltd v.Ramesht Industry Pvt Ltd
The Plaintiffs, Laboratories Griffon Pvt Ltd, filed a suit alleging trade mark infringement and passing off against the Defendants, Ramesht Industry Pvt Ltd. The dispute centers on the use of identical or confusingly similar marks (GLIMET, GLIMET-1, GLIMET-2) for pharmaceutical products used in treating diabetes. The Court found a prima facie case and granted an ad-interim injunction.
Bhavesh Suresh Kataria v.Kataria Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd
The plaintiff, an insurance consultant operating under various names including Kataria Jewellery Insurance Consultancy, sought an ad-interim injunction against the defendant, a private limited company, for using a deceptively similar domain name (www.katariainsurance.co.in) to his established mark. The court found that the similarity was too great and ruled in favor of granting immediate injunctive relief.
Unilever Plc v.Radhe Cosmetics
The Bombay High Court passed an interim application order, confirming a previous order and granting a temporary injunction. The injunction restrains Radhe Cosmetics from manufacturing or trading cosmetic preparations using marks or trade dress deceptively similar to Unilever's registered trademarks (like LAKME NINE TO FIVE) and copyrighted artistic works.
Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd v.BRD Medilabs & Anr
Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd filed a Commercial IP Suit against BRD Medilabs & Anr regarding trademark infringement. The court decreed the suit in specific terms, requiring the defendants to apply for the cancellation of their registered mark 'Sanaret Labs' and withdraw their service mark application within four weeks.
Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd v.Mhs Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd
Centaur Pharmaceuticals filed a Leave Petition against MHS Pharmaceuticals regarding the alleged infringement of its long-standing pharmaceutical trademark, SINAREST, by the Defendant's mark, SINARITE. The court granted the leave petition and directed both parties to file affidavits in reply and rejoinder within specified timelines.
Unilever Plc v.Sovereign Chemicals And Cosmetics
The dispute involved allegations that the Defendant was illicitly using the Plaintiff's statutory and common law rights, including trademarks, trade dress, and copyright in label artwork. The Defendant claimed a license from a proprietor in Saudi Arabia.
B4U Television Network India Limited v.Jay Shree Praveen Enterprises And Ors
The Bombay High Court addressed an Interim Application filed by B4U Television Network India Limited concerning the pending Commercial IP Suit. The court noted that some defendants had not yet been served and directed the plaintiff to complete service at the earliest.
Unilever Plc v.Sovereign Chemicals And Cosmetics
The Plaintiff (Unilever Plc) filed suit alleging that the Defendant was illicitly using its trademark, trade dress, and copyrighted artwork on rival products. The court found prima facie evidence of violation, noting that the defendant's claim of an international license did not negate infringement rights in India.
Unilever PLC v.Sovereign Chemicals & Cosmetics
Unilever PLC filed an IP suit against Sovereign Chemicals & Cosmetics alleging infringement of its trademark, copyright, and common law rights related to product labeling and trade dress. The defendant claimed they were operating under a license in Saudi Arabia. The court found the use illicit but allowed the defendant to proceed by accepting their submission regarding the prayer clause.
Xotik Frujus Pvt Ltd v.Kishan Hirji Gothi Sole Proprietor Of Bubalus Beverages
Xotik Frujus Pvt Ltd filed a Commercial IP Suit against Kishan Hirji Gothi for alleged infringement. The Defendant submitted to the decree terms, leading the Court to dispose of the suit in favor of the Plaintiff.
Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd. v.Dag Creative Media Pvt. Ltd.
Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd. filed a Leave Petition in the Bombay High Court against Dag Creative Media Pvt. Ltd. The court initially granted leave for the petition. Furthermore, the petitioner sought permission to amend their plaint to accurately describe the nature of the commercial suit. The bench allowed this amendment, allowing the litigation to proceed with corrected pleadings.
Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd v.Mankind Pharma Ltd
The plaintiff filed a suit for trademark infringement combined with passing off. The defendant challenged the court's jurisdiction, arguing that since both parties had offices in Delhi, the Bombay High Court lacked competence to hear the common law claim. The court rejected this submission, affirmed its jurisdiction under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and made the Clause XIV Petition absolute.
Unilever Plc. v.Ashok Kumar (Unknown Person)
The court considered an Interim Application filed by Unilever Plc. against Ashok Kumar regarding patent infringement. The Court granted leave to amend the pleadings, noting that infringing goods were being marketed by a third party (Sunil Garg). Consequently, an ad-interim order was passed under Clause XIV of the Letter Patent.
Yogi Ayurvedic Products Pvt Ltd v.The Yogi And 2 Ors
The Plaintiff, a private limited company, filed an interim application seeking protection for its registered and formative marks under 'YOGI' against the Defendants. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants were infringing these marks and attempting to pass off their goods using 'THE YOGI' online. The Court found a prima facie case made out and permitted the plaintiff to proceed with the ad-interim relief application.
Everest Food Products Private Limited v.Taparia Industries And Anr
The court addressed a Leave Petition filed by Everest Food Products Private Limited seeking to combine causes of action related to passing off and infringement. The court directed that since the Defendants were in Jaipur, service must be effected by courier with proof of delivery.
Bajaj Electricals Limited v.Urban Foodmart India Pvt Ltd
Bajaj Electricals Limited filed an Interim Application against Urban Foodmart India Pvt Ltd for alleged trademark infringement related to the mark "BAJAJ SUPERMART". The court accepted an undertaking from the Defendants that they would cease using the infringing mark pending the final disposal of the application and remove all associated signage.
International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) v.Vishna Foods Private Limited
The Bombay High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) against Vishna Foods Private Limited. The court found a prima facie case that the defendant was infringing on ISKCON's registered trademark and engaging in passing off by using a deceptively similar mark across various goods and services. This interim relief prevents the defendant from continuing unauthorized use of the mark until the final disposal of the suit.
The Bhor Chemicals And Plastics Private Ltd v.Amol K Patil & Anr
The Plaintiff filed a suit seeking protection of its confidential information and proprietary industrial technology/trade secrets, alleging that Defendant No. 1 (a former employee) stole samples and passed on this confidential information to Defendant No. 2. The court heard the interim application for ad-interim reliefs.
Bisleri International Pvt.Ltd v.Laxmikanta Nayak
The court heard an interim application filed by Bisleri International Pvt.Ltd against Laxmikanta Nayak regarding passing off related to drinking water bottles. The parties suggested a settlement, but the court noted undertakings from the defendant regarding not possessing specific moulds or manufacturing depicted bottles.
Unilever Plc v.Ashok Kumar
The Plaintiffs, Unilever Plc, sought to amend their suit against Ashok Kumar. The court allowed the petition under Clause XIV to combine the cause of action in passing off with that in infringement, and also permitted the Interim Application for amendments. Consequently, a further ad-interim order was granted regarding the passing off claim.
Godrej Consumer Products Ltd v.Deepak Bhatia And Anr
The court heard an interim application and a leave petition filed by Godrej Consumer Products Ltd against Deepak Bhatia and Anr. The court granted the Leave Petition absolute and issued an additional ad-interim order concerning the cause of action in passing off.
Lakme Lever Pvt Ltd v.Annapurna Enterprises And Anr
The Bombay High Court granted interim relief in favor of Lakme Lever Pvt Ltd, a subsidiary of Hindustan Unilever Limited. The court found that despite the termination of a franchise agreement, the respondents continued unlawfully using Lakme's brand name, logo, uniforms, and associated trade materials. Consequently, the court issued an injunction and appointed a Court Receiver to take possession of all branded assets from the respondent's premises, preventing further unauthorized use.
Unilever Plc v.Pawan Saini
Plaintiffs, Unilever Plc, filed a suit alleging infringement of their registered trademarks (SURF/SURF EXCEL) and copyrights related to detergent packaging by the defendant. The plaintiffs presented evidence of counterfeit goods bearing slavish imitations of their marks and artworks.
Unilever Plc v.Ashok Kumar (Unknown Person)
Plaintiffs, Unilever Plc, filed an interim application seeking ad-interim reliefs against the defendant, Ashok Kumar (an unknown person), for infringement of their registered trademarks and copyrights, combined with an action for passing off. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant was marketing and selling counterfeit goods using pirated artworks of SURF EXCEL detergent preparations.
Xotik Frujus Pvt. Ltd. v.Visat Beverages (Od)
The plaintiff, Xotik Frujus Pvt. Ltd., filed an interim application alleging that the defendant, Visat Beverages (Od), was infringing its registered trademarks and copyright related to its popular fruit drink 'JEERU'. The plaintiff argued that the defendant's product bore a slavish imitation of the plaintiff's mark and label. The court granted temporary relief in the form of an injunction and appointed a Court Receiver.
Midas Hygiene Industries Private Limited v.Ram Dev Industries And Anr.
Midas Hygiene Industries Private Limited filed a Leave Petition seeking permission from the Bombay High Court to initiate a civil suit against Ram Dev Industries & Anr. The petitioner alleged that the respondents were infringing upon their registered trademarks and engaging in passing off. The court examined the petition, noting the combined cause of action for infringement and passing off. Consequently, the court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent, allowing the petitioner to proceed with the suit.
Facing a similar IP matter?
Arctic Invent is a specialist IP firm with deep litigation expertise across India, EU, US, and UK. Our team uses data-driven strategy to build stronger cases.