Bombay High Court
667 cases · page 17 of 23
Showing 481–509Hindustan 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.
Kleenage Products (India) Pvt.Ltd v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks And Anr
The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of Kleenage Products, directing the Registrar of Trade Marks to restore and renew the trademark 'KLITOLIN'. The core issue was whether the mandatory prior notice (Form O-3) under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, had been issued before the mark's removal. Since the respondents could not provide documentary evidence proving the issuance of this critical notice, the Court held that the removal was illegal and allowed the petitioner to renew the trademark.
Ansari Bilal Ahmadlal Mohd. (Appellant) v.Shafeeque Ahmed Mohammad Sayeed (Respondent-Plaintiff)
The Bombay High Court dismissed the defendant's commercial appeal, upholding the original plaintiff's claim of passing off. The court found that a strong prima-facie case existed for passing off, despite differences in calligraphy and design elements. Considering the target audience—laborers with imperfect recollection—the court ruled that the defendant's use of 'SUKOON' was deceptively similar to the plaintiff's established brand, thereby protecting the plaintiff's proprietary rights.
Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd v.Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt Ltd
Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd filed a quia timet copyright infringement and passing off action against Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt Ltd, alleging that Sony illegally copied the format and concept of Zee's popular talent hunt show, 'India's Best Dramebaaz'. The court heard the Notice of Motion regarding the dispute.
Cello Household Products v.Modware India
Cello Household Products filed suit against Modware India alleging design infringement and passing off regarding their PURO brand plastic water bottle. Cello claimed its unique, registered design was illicitly copied by Modware's product, KUDOZ. The court addressed the prima facie case for interim relief.
Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited v.Wockhardt Limited And Anr
The Bombay High Court addressed a Notice of Motion concerning an action in passing off brought by Torrent Pharmaceuticals against Wockhardt. The court analyzed the 'classical trinity' of passing off, focusing on misrepresentation and reputation. Ultimately, the judge found that Torrent failed to establish a prima facie case for passing off due to the long co-existence of the rival products without any demonstrated confusion or deception. Consequently, the interim injunction sought by Torrent was dismissed.
Franco-Indian Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. v.Lupin Ltd And Anr
The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Franco-Indian Pharmaceuticals against the refusal of interim relief. The dispute centered on alleged infringement and passing off concerning the medicinal preparation DEXORANGE, whose packaging and trade mark were copied by the respondents (Lupin Ltd And Anr). Despite strong claims regarding identical artistic work and deceptive similarity, the court found no immediate case for injunction after an 11-year delay in seeking relief. However, the court directed that the original suit be expedited, keeping all core issues of infringement and passing off open for future adjudication.
Mandev Tubes Pvt. Ltd v.Kalpesh R. Jain And 2 Ors
The Plaintiff, Mandev Tubes Pvt. Ltd., sought protection for its registered design (No. 224751) concerning copper tubes, alleging that the Defendants infringed this design and engaged in passing off. The Plaintiff claimed the design was novel and original, featuring an expanded bell shape at one end of the tube.
Intouch Leather House India Pvt. Ltd v.Ishaan Overseas
The Plaintiff, Intouch Leather House India Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit alleging trademark infringement and passing off against Ishaan Overseas for using the mark 'EDMODA' on leather goods. The Plaintiff claimed its mark 'ESBEDA' was deceptively similar. However, the court found that the marks were sufficiently distinct visually and phonetically, leading to the dismissal of the motion.
People Interactive (India) Private Limited v.Vivek Pahwa And 4 Ors
The Bombay High Court ruled against People Interactive in its suit seeking to restrain the defendants from using the domain name 'secondshaadi.com' and passing off their services as those of Shaadi.com. Despite the Plaintiff holding registered trademarks and substantial goodwill, the court found that the Plaintiff was estopped by acquiescence. The judgment emphasizes that a trademark owner who is aware of an infringing use but remains silent while the competitor grows cannot later claim exclusivity.
The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v.Entertainment Network (India) Ltd.
This case involved disputes arising from a license agreement between The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. (a Copyright Society) and Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. (an FM radio station operator). The core dispute centered on whether the claimant needed a license to broadcast copyrighted musical works, and subsequent claims regarding royalty payments and refunds. The Bombay High Court reviewed the arbitral award, ultimately setting aside one part of it due to lack of jurisdiction while allowing the petition filed by the Copyright Society.
The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v.Entertainment Network (India) Ltd.
This case involved disputes between The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. (a Copyright Society) and Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. concerning the use of copyrighted musical and literary works on FM radio stations. Both parties challenged an arbitral award dated December 6, 2011, before the Bombay High Court. The core legal battle centered on whether the claims regarding licensing and royalty refunds were arbitrable or required adjudication by a Civil Court. The court ultimately set aside part of the original award concerning the claimant's right to broadcast due to lack of jurisdiction, while dismissing the petitioner's (claimant's) arbitration petition.
Akashaditya Harishchandra Lama v.Ashutosh Gowarikar And 4 Ors
The plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion alleging that his creative work had been plagiarized. The court dismissed the motion, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish a sufficient prima facie case due to an ever-shifting stand on what was infringed. Furthermore, the court criticized the plaintiff's conduct for publicizing the litigation in the media.
M/S. Selvel Industries v.M/S. Om Plast (India)
The plaintiffs, M/S. Selvel Industries and M/S. Sears Industries, filed a Notice of Motion seeking interim relief in an infringement action against M/S. Om Plast (India). The dispute centered on whether the defendant's plastic container infringed upon the registered designs held by the plaintiffs. The court found that the defendant's product was deceptively similar to and infringed the plaintiffs' design.
Ctr Manufacturing Industries Ltd. v.Serji Transformer Explosion Prevention Technologies Private Limited
The petitioner (CTR) filed four Notices of Motion alleging that the respondent (Sergi) was repeatedly and contumaciously breaching prior restraint orders issued in a patent infringement suit. The judgment addressed these 'contempt Motions', which were tied to an ongoing appeal regarding CTR's patent for explosion and fire detection technology.
Ctr Manufacturing Industries Ltd. v.Serji Transformer Explosion Prevention Technologies Private Limited
The petitioner (CTR) filed four notices of motion alleging that the respondent (Sergi) was repeatedly breaching prior restraint orders related to a patent infringement suit concerning explosion and fire detection technology for transformers. The court examined these 'contempt motions' but ultimately dismissed all four applications.
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.