Bombay High Court
653 cases · page 16 of 22
Showing 451–479Hindustan Unilever Ltd v.R. R. Trading Company
Hindustan Unilever Ltd filed a Notice of Motion against R.R. Trading Company alleging that the defendant was using a label mark and trade dress deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's distinctive BROOK BOND RED LABEL/RED LABEL for tea products. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim injunction restraining the defendant from passing off their goods.
Jawed Habib Hair And Beauty Limited v.Manoj Kumar Sharma
The petitioner, Jawed Habib Hair And Beauty Limited, filed an IP Suit against Manoj Kumar Sharma regarding alleged infringement of its trade marks. The court granted leave to the defendant and passed an interim order restraining him from using 'JAWED HABIB' or 'JH' in connection with hair salon services pending the final hearing.
Kokanratna Holiday Resorts Limited v.Millennium & Copthorne International Limited
The Bombay High Court granted a limited ad-interim relief to Kokanratna Holiday Resorts Limited, protecting its use of the name 'Hotel Millennium Park' and associated domain. The court ruled that pending the final suit, the Defendant must provide at least 7 days prior written notice before initiating any legal action claiming infringement or passing off against the Plaintiff. This decision provides immediate protection against groundless threats while the main litigation proceeds.
Nawaz Modi and Anr. v.Design Your Body Art/New Body Art Fitness Club and Ors.
The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Body Basic Healthcare Pvt Ltd (Nawaz Modi), finding that the defendants were infringing on their registered trademarks and engaging in passing off. The court granted a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from using similar marks like 'NEW BODY ART' or misrepresenting their services as connected to the plaintiffs. Furthermore, the defendants were ordered to withdraw an application for registration of the mark 'BODY ART GYM' and pay substantial damages.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Modi Powder And Shop Company and 2 Others
The petitioner filed an IP suit against the respondents regarding impugned goods. The court noted that local police authorities refused to assist the Court Receiver in seizing and sealing the goods as directed by a previous order. Furthermore, Defendant No.2 failed to appear in court, leading the court to issue a bailable warrant.
Powerhouse Licensing LLC v.Ashok Banwarilal Gupta Trading As Qs
In this Bombay High Court matter concerning alleged trademark infringement, the court accepted an undertaking from the defendants. The defendants committed to refraining from using the trademark or trade name 'POWERHOUSE' across all platforms, including websites and social media. This interim order allows the case to proceed while securing immediate protection for the petitioner's brand.
Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd. v.Shri Ajanta Fabrics And 9 Others
The petitioner filed an IP suit against the respondents alleging infringement and passing off related to their registered trademarks ('Meena Prints' and 'Cotton Design') and associated copyrights used in textile goods. The court granted permanent injunctions restraining the defendants from using similar marks and ordered them to pay damages.
Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd. v.Shri Ajanta Fabrics And 9 Others
The petitioner, Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd., filed an IP suit against Shri Ajanta Fabrics and others for infringement and passing off related to its registered trademarks ('Meena Prints' and 'Cotton Design') and associated copyrights. The court granted permanent injunctions restraining the defendants from using similar marks in relation to textile goods.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Modi Powder and Soap Company & Ors
The petitioner filed a notice of motion regarding the execution of an ex-parte ad interim injunction order. The court found that local police authorities refused to assist the Court Receiver, and the defendants also obstructed the seizure and sealing of the impugned goods. Consequently, the court passed further orders directing the concerned parties to appear before it.
Cello Plastic Industrial Work And Ors. v.Ajay Shantilal Raka
The Bombay High Court issued an interim order in a trademark dispute involving Cello Plastic Industrial Work and Ajay Shantilal Raka. The court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to produce specific application and opposition records before the next hearing date. This procedural step indicates that the case is actively moving forward, requiring both parties to prepare for detailed examination of the relevant intellectual property filings.
Unilever Plc. v.Bhanu Chauhan
Unilever Plc. filed a Notice of Motion seeking restraining orders against Bhanu Chauhan and others for using logos and trademarks deceptively similar to Unilever's well-known brands (DOMEX). The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim order.
Magnolia Ltd. v.Softgel Health Care Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court granted a temporary injunction favoring Magnolia Ltd. against Softgel Health Care Pvt. Ltd. The court ordered that pending the final disposal of the suit, the defendant is restrained from manufacturing, selling, exporting, or using the disputed trademark 'VAGICLIN Plus' in connection with any pharmaceutical product. This interim order significantly protects the plaintiff's brand rights while the main infringement case proceeds.
Novartis Ag v.Aanchal Corp
The case involves a Notice of Motion filed by Novartis AG seeking an injunction against Aanchal Corp. for infringing their Indian Patent No. 212815 related to pharmaceutical products containing Vildagliptin.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Sainath Enterprise
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a commercial suit against Sainath Enterprise alleging that the defendant was using an identical or deceptively similar label mark and trade dress on their detergent powder, thereby passing off their goods as those of the plaintiff. The court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim order.
Vocco Consultants And 2 Ors. v.Vicco Agencies Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court addressed a commercial suit concerning the trademark 'VICCO'. While the original suit was stayed pending a rectification application before the IPAB, the court took proactive steps to address the core dispute. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the court framed an additional issue specifically questioning whether the Defendant's registration of the mark 'VICCO' is bad in law and liable for invalidation.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Joshi Products
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed an IP suit against Joshi Products alleging infringement of its copyrighted artistic label and distinctive trade dress for its detergent powder, WHEEL. The Bombay High Court granted leave to defend the suit and subsequently decreed it in favor of HUL.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Lite Detergent Soap
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion against Lite Detergent Soap. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent and also granted specific interim reliefs sought by the plaintiff, which will remain in force until further orders.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Jai Hind Gruh Udhyog
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed an IP Suit against Jai Hind Gruh Udhyog alleging infringement of its distinctive WHEEL label and trade dress in the soap and detergent industry. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim injunction.
Nakoda Plast Industries v.Amisha Plastic
Nakoda Plast Industries filed an IP suit against Amisha Plastic. The parties subsequently entered into Consent Terms, which were accepted by the Court.
Hotel Panchavati Gaurav v.Anviti Foods And 2 Others
Hotel Panchavati Gaurav filed an IP suit against Anviti Foods and others alleging infringement of its registered trademarks and copyright related to the name PANCHAVATI GAURAV. The Bombay High Court granted perpetual injunctions restraining the defendants from using the infringing marks and ordered the defendants to pay Rs. 12,00,000/- towards costs/damages.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.S.G.K. Industries
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a suit against S.G.K. Industries alleging infringement and passing off related to its 'SPLAT' trade mark used in detergent preparations. The Bombay High Court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the infringing marks pending final disposal of the suit.
Metro Shoes Limited v.V. Retail Pvt.Ltd.
The Bombay High Court disposed of the suit (COMIP (L) No. 1073 of 2018) between Metro Shoes Limited and V. Retail Pvt.Ltd. after both parties submitted Consent Terms dated August 30, 2018. The court accepted these terms, leading to the disposal of both the Suit and the Notice of Motion.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.S.G.K. Industries
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion against S.G.K. Industries alleging infringement and passing off related to the 'SPLAT' trade mark used for detergent preparations. The Bombay High Court granted interim injunctions restraining the defendant from using any identical or deceptively similar marks, pending final disposal of the suit.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Suchit Industries
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a suit against Suchit Industries alleging infringement related to the soap brand 'Karan'. The defendant, Suchit Murkute, admitted manufacturing soaps under the brand but undertook not to use the splat logo in the future. The Court granted leave and decreed the suit based on these undertakings.
Hotel Panchavati Gaurav v.Saikadam Foods And Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
Hotel Panchavati Gaurav filed an IP suit against Saikadam Foods And Beverages Pvt. Ltd. for infringing its registered trademarks and copyrights associated with the name PANCHAVATI GAURAV. The Bombay High Court granted leave, decreed the suit, and passed a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from using similar marks or labels.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Rds Industries
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed an IP Suit against Rds Industries alleging infringement of its registered trademarks, specifically the 'Device of SPLAT' mark used in detergent preparations. The court granted leave and passed an order restraining the defendant from using any identical or deceptively similar marks pending the final hearing of the suit.
Tapas Kanti Mandal v.Cosmo Films Ltd.
The petitioner, a former employee of Cosmo Films Ltd., challenged an injunction granted by the trial court restraining him from working in competing businesses after his resignation. The plaintiff company relied on a non-compete clause and confidentiality agreements regarding trade secrets and proprietary knowledge. The High Court ruled that post-service negative restrictive covenants are generally not enforceable, favoring the petitioner's right to profession.
Syed Zakirali S/o Syed Jawarali v.Syed Zahidali S/o Syed Jawarali & Ors
The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal filed by Syed Zakirali against the dismissal of his civil suit concerning trademark infringement. The court held that Defendant No. 2 was illegally passing off goods as those of the plaintiff using disputed wrappers and labels ('322 pucca label' and '322 A.K.'). Consequently, the defendant was restrained from using these marks if the plaintiff renews them, and ordered to pay damages or render accounts of profits.
Kalpesh R Jain And 2 Ors v.Mandev Tubes Private Limited
Mandev Tubes Pvt. Ltd. filed a commercial suit alleging that Hariom Metals & Tubes (the appellants) infringed its registered design for copper tubes, specifically claiming imitation of the unique bell-shaped ending. The plaintiff asserted substantial goodwill and market presence under trademarks like 'MT ECO SELF CONNECT'. However, the Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants, upholding the single judge's finding that the plaintiff had demonstrated a prima facie case of infringement and passing off.
Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited v.Karmaveer Shankarrao Kale Shahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited
This appeal before the Bombay High Court challenged a trial court order that restrained the appellants from using the artistic label 'Military Santra' for selling country liquor. The appellants argued that the respondent-plaintiff had prior knowledge of the label since 2005 and was therefore acquiescent, invalidating the injunction. Furthermore, they contended that their own usage since 1975 established their copyright in the artwork. The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the restrictive order and directing the trial court to expedite the disposal of the main Copyright 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.