Bombay High Court
637 cases · page 7 of 22
Showing 181–209Mody Pumps Inc v.Sovereign Pumping Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
The plaintiffs filed an interim application alleging that defendants, former employees, colluded to steal copyrighted engineering drawings and confidential data relating to water pumps. The plaintiffs sought a restraining order against the defendants for manufacturing and marketing identical products. The court granted an interim injunction but stayed its operation for one week.
Resilient Innovations Private Limited v.Phonepe Private Limited
Resilient Innovations Private Limited challenged an order passed by the lower court that allowed Phonepe Private Limited to withdraw its trademark infringement suit with liberty to file a fresh one. The Appellant argued this grant constituted a jurisdictional error and should be appealable. However, the Bombay High Court ultimately dismissed the appeal on the grounds of maintainability, holding that the Impugned Order was not a 'decree' under the CPC. While avoiding comment on the merits of the IP dispute, the court provided clarity on the legal effect of such withdrawal orders.
Resilient Innovations Private Limited v.PhonePe Private Limited
This appeal challenged an order that allowed the plaintiff (PhonePe Private Limited) to withdraw its initial commercial IP suit concerning trademark infringement and passing off, while retaining the liberty to file a fresh suit. The appellant (Resilient Innovations Private Limited) argued this order was erroneous and not maintainable for appeal. The Bombay High Court ultimately dismissed the appeal, holding that the Impugned Order did not qualify as a 'decree' under the CPC, thereby ruling on the issue of maintainability.
Lyka Labs Limited v.Lyka Biotech Private Limited
The petitioner, Lyka Labs Limited, filed an Interim Application against Lyka Biotech Private Limited for infringement of its trademark 'LYKA' and passing off. The court accepted the defendant's statement that it had discontinued using the impugned mark and domain name. Consequently, the court passed a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from using similar marks in relation to pharmaceutical products.
Everest Food Products Private Limited v.Ginodia Agro And Anr.
Everest Food Products Private Limited filed a petition seeking leave to institute a suit against Ginodia Agro and others, alleging infringement of copyright, trademark, and passing off. The court examined the jurisdictional requirements for such an IP dispute in Mumbai. The judge held that since the plaintiff operates within the court's jurisdiction, obtaining leave under Clause XII was unnecessary, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Jupiter Life Line Hospitals Limited v.Aatmaj Healthcare Private Limited
Jupiter Life Line Hospitals Limited sought an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against Aatmaj Healthcare Private Limited for alleged infringement of its registered trademark 'JUPITER' (Registration No. 1675980). The plaintiff claimed that the defendants were using similar marks, such as "StayGo Jupiter Multispecialty Hospital," in relation to running hospitals and providing medical services. The court found a strong prima facie case for infringement and granted the interim injunction.
Siddhant Icecreams LLP and Ors. v.Venkata Siva Suhas Kumar Bommisetty & Ors.
The Plaintiffs, Siddhant Icecreams LLP and Ors., filed an interim application seeking relief against the Defendants for infringement of their registered 'NATURAL' family marks and passing off. The court granted an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the infringing marks and ordering them to remove related online advertisements.
Ageless Clinic Private Limited v.Am Ageless Private Limited
The Bombay High Court granted further interim relief in favor of Ageless Clinic Private Limited against Am Ageless Private Limited. Despite previous orders, the Defendant failed to comply by continuing to use infringing business names on signage, maintaining deceptive domain names (like i-am-ageless-aesthetic-and-dental-centre.business), and active social media accounts. The Court made absolute the Leave Petition for Letters of Patent and issued a strong injunction restraining the defendant from using any mark or handle containing 'AGELESS' that could lead to passing off.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited v.Walpar Healthcare And Anr.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited filed an Interim Application against Walpar Healthcare & Anr. alleging passing off and trademark infringement concerning their respective marks, DUZELA and DIZELA. The court found a case made out for granting ad-interim relief based on the findings of the previous order.
Hygienic Research Institute Private Ltd. v.Amit Saini & Ors.
The Bombay High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Hygienic Research Institute Private Ltd. against Amit Saini & Ors. The court found sufficient grounds, based on prior ex-parte findings, to establish a case for passing off and trademark infringement. This interim order prohibits the defendants from copying or counterfeiting the plaintiff's 'STREAX PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPER' products or using deceptively similar marks like 'STREAX,' thereby preventing them from misrepresenting their goods as those of the plaintiff.
Louis Vuitton Malletier v.Sharmila Lalit Vyas And Anr.
Louis Vuitton Malletier filed an Interim Application seeking an injunction against the Defendants to prevent them from manufacturing, selling, or distributing products featuring the impugned LV mark or deceptively similar marks. The court directed the Applicant/Plaintiff to serve the proceedings on the Defendants before considering any ad-interim relief.
Growthpond Technology Pvt Ltd v.VGD Technologies Pvt Ltd
Growthpond Technology Pvt Ltd filed a petition seeking leave to initiate a lawsuit against VGD Technologies Pvt Ltd concerning alleged trademark infringement and passing off. The petitioner argued that no such leave was required under Clause XII of the Letters Patent, as the main suit addressed these IP violations. Furthermore, counsel established the Bombay High Court's jurisdiction based on the Petitioner's Mumbai registration. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Maruti Air Couriers & Cargo Pvt. Ltd. v.Ram Singh Rathore & 9 Ors.
The plaintiffs filed an interim application alleging that their former franchisees (Defendants nos. 1 to 9) and a newly incorporated entity (Defendant no. 10) were continuing to use the original artistic label and name of 'Maruti Air Couriers' on consignment notes and trade documents after the termination of their franchise agreements. The plaintiffs claimed this constituted copyright infringement and passing off.
Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd v.Cratus Pharma Limited
Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd filed a Commercial IP Suit against Cratus Pharma Limited alleging infringement of its registered trade marks ("CRATUS" and "CRATUS LIFE CARE"). The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement, which was accepted by the court.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Muhammed Rafi
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a suit against Muhammed Rafi alleging infringement of its registered trademark, 'SPLAT LOGO', used for detergent goods. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement.
Xotik Frujus Pvt. Ltd. v.Bubalus Beverages
In this trademark infringement matter before the Bombay High Court, Xotik Frujus Pvt. Ltd. sought urgent relief against Bubalus Beverages for continuing to infringe upon their mark despite a prior consent decree. While the plaintiff pressed for immediate action due to the defendant's alleged continued deception, the court granted a short adjournment. The parties are scheduled to be listed again on November 26, 2021, for hearing on ad-interim relief.
Unilever Plc. v.Malti Ice Cream Industries
The Bombay High Court disposed of the Commercial IP Suit after the defendants volunteered to submit to a decree. The court allowed the petition for leave and passed a decree in favor of the plaintiffs, while permitting the defendants to destroy the wrappers bearing the offending marks under specific conditions.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd v.Vedansh Industries
Hindustan Unilever Ltd filed a Commercial IP Suit against Vedansh Industries. The proprietor of the Defendant agreed to submit to a decree in terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, the Court decreed the suit, ordering the destruction of seized goods by the Defendants.
AMPM Designs Thr. Partner Akash Mehta v.Intellectual Property Appellate Board (Mumbai Bench)
The Bombay High Court allowed a writ petition filed by AMPM Designs, quashing an Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) order that sought to remove its registered trade mark 'AMPM Designs' from the register. The court found that the IPAB erred in law and fact, specifically by failing to consider binding Supreme Court precedents regarding rectification applications. Crucially, the High Court determined that the petitioner's business (interior design services) was materially distinct from the respondent's primary business (fashion apparels), thus negating any likelihood of consumer confusion.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd v.Babbar
The Bombay High Court disposed of Commercial IP Suit No. 19 of 2021 after both the Plaintiff (Hindustan Unilever Ltd) and Defendant (Babbar) reached a settlement. The suit was decreed in terms of specific prayer clauses, with the Plaintiff agreeing not to press for damages.
Galpha Laboratories Limited v.Shivansh Shrivastava
The Plaintiff, a pharmaceutical company, filed an opposition against the Defendant's application for the trade mark BFOLIN. The court examined the similarity between the established mark B-COLEN and the proposed mark BFOLIN. Satisfied that there is a prima facie case of likelihood of confusion, the court granted an ad-interim injunction.
SaNotize Research and Development v.Lupin Limited
The court permitted the plaintiff to amend their plaint, specifically regarding the separation of pure copyright material into a new exhibit. Given the sensitive nature of both parties' confidential information, the court ordered a controlled inspection meeting between limited representatives of both sides to facilitate further proceedings.
SaNOtize Research and Development Corp. v.Lupin Ltd
SaNOtize Research and Development Corp. filed suit against Lupin Limited alleging infringement of its Nitric Oxide Releasing Solution (NORS) technology, breach of confidentiality, and copyright infringement related to its nasal spray product, NONS/ENOVID. The dispute centers on the use of a proprietary dual-chamber delivery system for nitric oxide in medical treatment. The court granted an interim prohibitory injunction against Lupin's Indian arm and manufacturer.
Siddhant Icecreams LLP v.Mind Blowing Naturals LLP
The Plaintiffs, proprietors of the mark NATURAL for ice creams since 1983/84, filed an interim application alleging that Defendants were using a substantially similar mark (MIND BLOWING NATURALS) and infringing their copyrighted logo. The Court found prima facie evidence of confusion and deception.
Xotik Frujus Pvt Ltd v.Silvassa Bottling Co
The dispute involved alleged infringement concerning a registered label used by Xotik Frujus Pvt Ltd for its beverage product, JEERU. Following an ad-interim order appointing a Court Receiver, the parties reached an agreement regarding labeling changes and the handling of seized goods.
Procter And Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Ltd v.Danish Health Care Pvt Ltd
The Bombay High Court disposed of an Interim Application filed by Procter and Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Ltd against Danish Health Care Pvt Ltd. The court confirmed the continuation of a previous ex parte order and directed that further orders would be passed on the cause of action in passing off.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd v.Vansh Cosmatic & Anr
The court heard an interim application regarding a commercial IP suit filed by Hindustan Unilever Ltd against Vansh Cosmatic & Anr. The defendants offered a token amount as damages, but the court noted that the counterfeit HUL goods were being sold at MRP, indicating significant potential damage. Consequently, the court granted further injunctions and allowed the seizure of counterfeit goods.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Aarif Miraj And Anr
The Bombay High Court heard an interim application filed by Hindustan Unilever Limited against Aarif Miraj and others. The court confirmed the execution of previous orders, granted an injunction concerning passing off, and allowed the plaintiff liberty to file a further application for the destruction of counterfeit products.
Brandzstorm India Marketing Pvt Ltd v.LN Agency
The Bombay High Court granted interim relief in favor of Brandzstorm India Marketing Pvt Ltd, the registered proprietor of the 'LUXXUBERANCE' trademark. The court found a prima facie case for infringement, noting that despite the termination of the franchise agreement, the Defendant continued to use the Plaintiff's mark. Consequently, the court appointed a Court Receiver and an Additional Special Receiver in Jamshedpur to seize and inventory all infringing goods and issue a temporary injunction against the Defendant's further misuse of the trademark.
Huntington Alloys Corporation v.Union Of India And 3 Ors
The petitioner challenged the rejection orders passed by respondent nos. 3 and 4 regarding its patent application for "Ultra Supercritical Boiler Header Alloy and Method of Preparation". The petitioner argued that these orders were passed without hearing them, making the 'prima facie' satisfaction perverse. The court directed both parties to file their respective replies and rejoinders.
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.