Bombay High Court
667 cases · page 9 of 23
Showing 241–269Huntington 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.
Hasmukhrai And Co. v.Nishi Enterprises
The Bombay High Court disposed of the interim application after both parties reached an agreement. The Defendants submitted to a decree based on the plaint's prayer clauses, and agreed to destroy all infringing labels and materials within three weeks.
M/S Mysore Deep Perfumery House, Indore v.Sunilkumar A. Jain, Sole Prop. M/S ...
The Bombay High Court granted a temporary injunction in favor of M/S Mysore Deep Perfumery House against Sunilkumar A. Jain, despite procedural objections raised by the defendant. The court found that the plaintiff had satisfied the 'trinity test' (prior user, reputation, and likelihood of deception) at the trial level. Crucially, the court noted that the defendant's claim of acquiescence was based on potentially forged documents provided to the trial court, leading the High Court to grant interim relief.
M/S Mysore Deep Perfumery House, Indore v.Sunilkumar A. Jain, Sole Prop. M/S ...
The Bombay High Court granted a temporary injunction in favor of M/S Mysore Deep Perfumery House against Sunilkumar A. Jain, despite procedural objections raised by the defendant. The court found that the plaintiff had satisfied the 'trinity test' (prior user, reputation, and likelihood of deception) at the trial level. Crucially, the court noted that the defendant's claim of acquiescence was based on potentially forged documents provided to the trial court, leading the High Court to grant interim relief.
M/S Mysore Deep Perfumery House, Indore v.Sunilkumar A. Jain, Sole Prop. M/S ...
The Bombay High Court granted a temporary injunction favoring M/S Mysore Deep Perfumery House against Sunilkumar A. Jain, despite disputes over additional pleadings and evidence. The court found that the defendant's claim of acquiescence was questionable, particularly because it relied on documents later alleged to be forged by the third party (Astha Sales). This interim relief allows the plaintiff to continue pursuing their trademark rights while the full case proceeds.
Atotech Deutschland GmbH v.Grauer & Well (India) Limited
The Bombay High Court addressed a commercial appeal filed by Atotech Deutschland GmbH seeking urgent interim relief in a trademark infringement suit concerning its 'TRICHROME' mark. The initial refusal of the injunction was based partly on procedural delays. However, the Appellate Bench clarified that under the statutory scheme of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, immediate protection for registered trademarks should be prioritized over minor delays. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of with directions allowing Atotech to request an early hearing and have its ad-interim relief application reconsidered on its merits.
Control Print Limited v.Anmol Chugh Trading As Shavias Enterprises and Ors.
In a mixed IP dispute involving copyright infringement and passing off related to 'The Mask Lab,' the Bombay High Court granted ad-interim relief in favor of Control Print Limited. The court issued injunctions restraining the defendants from using designs substantially similar to the plaintiff's copyrighted artistic work, and from passing off their products as those of 'The Mask Lab.' Additionally, the order directed the removal of malicious reviews posted on the plaintiff's Google page, providing immediate protection pending final disposal of the suit.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Shri Mahaveer Jain Industries
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a suit against Shri Mahaveer Jain Industries alleging infringement of its distinctive original artwork, 'Elle 18 face,' used on nail polish packaging. The dispute centered on the defendant's use of similar artistic designs and potential passing off. Both parties amicably settled the matter before the Bombay High Court.
Rpg Enterprises Limited v.RPG Location Through Rajendra Gupta
The suit involved Rpg Enterprises Limited alleging passing off against RPG Location. The defendant, Rajendra Gupta, stated he had no intention to infringe and agreed to remove the disputed logo and stop using the stylized mark 'RPG'.
Rpg Enterprises Limited v.RPG Location Through Rajendra Gupta
The suit involved Rpg Enterprises Limited alleging infringement and passing off against RPG Location. The defendant, Rajendra Gupta, stated he had no intention to infringe but agreed to remove the disputed logo and stop using the stylized mark 'RPG'.
Pidilite Industries Limited v.Q-Chem Sealers Pvt Ltd
Pidilite Industries Ltd filed a suit seeking protection against infringement and passing off concerning its various marks, labels, and the unique design of its DR FIXIT storage containers. The court addressed an interim application regarding service of notice and combined the causes of action.
Liberty Oil Mills Limited v.N. M. Oil Enterprises
The petitioner, Liberty Oil Mills Limited, filed an interim application regarding a Commercial IP Suit. The court noted that the initial service of notice was insufficient as it did not specify a particular date for the ad-interim hearing. Consequently, the Court issued an order setting a specific date and requiring the plaintiff to provide detailed notice.
Franco Indian Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd v.Healthyraj Wellness Enterprises & Anr
The Plaintiff, a pharmaceutical company, sought an interim injunction against the Defendants for using the competing mark DIABIT. The court found that the Defendants' mark was structurally, visually, and phonetically almost indistinguishable from the Plaintiff's registered mark DIAVIT, leading to a significant likelihood of confusion.
Lupin Limited v.Celon Laboraatories Private Limited
Lupin Limited sought an urgent interim injunction in the Bombay High Court against Celon Laboraatories Private Limited for alleged trademark infringement and passing off. The dispute centered on the use of the mark BIVASSA by the defendant, which was deemed deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered anti-cancer drug mark BEVAZZA. The court found a sufficient prima facie case and granted an ad-interim injunction.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Vishal Products
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a suit against Vishal Products alleging infringement of copyright and passing off concerning the distinctive artistic label and trade dress of its 'WHEEL' detergent. The parties reached a consent order before the Bombay High Court, settling the dispute without pressing for damages or costs. Under the settlement, Vishal Products acknowledged HUL's proprietary rights, agreed to cease using the similar packaging, and committed to destroying all existing infringing stock.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited v.Salud Care (India) Private Limited
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited filed an interim application alleging that Salud Care (India) Private Limited was manufacturing and marketing a pharmaceutical preparation under the mark PROLOMEK, which was confusingly similar to Sun Pharma's registered trademark PROLOMET. The court found a prima facie case of infringement and passing off.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited v.Nova Indus Pharmaceuticals And Anr
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited filed a commercial IP suit alleging trademark infringement and passing off against Nova Indus Pharmaceuticals. The court examined the extreme phonetic and structural similarity between the marks PANTOCID and PANZOCID, finding that there was a sufficient prima facie case.
Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd v.Mhs Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd
Centaur Pharmaceuticals filed an Interim Application against MHS Pharmaceuticals. The court noted that the dispute was complex and did not meet the criteria for an immediate ad-interim order, requiring a final hearing after both parties submitted additional evidence.
Goldmines Telefilms Pvt Ltd v.Achla Sabharwal
The dispute concerns the ownership of the copyright in the 1987 Hindi film 'Sheela' between Goldmines Telefilms Pvt Ltd and Achla Sabharwal. Both parties claim to be the true assignee of the rights from the original producer, Dwarakish. Goldmines sought an interim injunction preventing Sabharwal from exploiting or claiming ownership of the copyright.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd v.Greypixy Udyog
The Commercial IP Suit filed by Hindustan Unilever Ltd against Greypixy Udyog was settled on April 21, 2021. The parties agreed to a decree based on the plaint's prayer clauses, leading to the disposal of the suit.
Unilever Plc v.Hemakesh Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd
The parties, Unilever Plc and Hemakesh Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd, settled their dispute in this Commercial IP Suit. The defendant submitted to a decree based on the plaint's prayer clauses, leading the plaintiff to drop its claim for damages.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Greypixy Udyog
The Bombay High Court disposed of a Commercial IP Suit between Hindustan Unilever Limited and Greypixy Udyog. The parties reached a settlement, with the Defendants agreeing to submit to the decree in terms of the plaint's prayer clauses.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Greypixy Udyog
The Bombay High Court disposed of the Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 3761 of 2021 after both parties reached a settlement. The Defendants agreed to submit to a decree based on the plaint's prayer clauses, and the Plaintiffs waived their claim for damages.
Cutis Biotech Thr.Its Sole Prop. v.Serum Institute of India Private
This Bombay High Court appeal addressed a dispute over the trademark 'Covishield' between Cutis Biotech and Serum Institute of India. Although both parties had pending applications for the mark, Cutis Biotech sought an interim injunction based on passing off. The court ultimately dismissed the appeal, finding that the balance of convenience did not favor the appellant, especially given the critical public health role of the 'Covishield' vaccine in ongoing vaccination drives.
Franco-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 Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd v.Nutramarck Lifesciences Pvt Ltd
This interim application sought relief concerning the alleged infringement of a trademark (STIMULIV) by the defendant (Nutramarck Lifesciences Pvt Ltd), which was using the mark IMMULIV. The defendant, through its director, provided assurances that they would cease manufacturing and using the impugned marks.
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.
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.