Calcutta High Court
384 cases · page 8 of 13
Showing 211–239Emami Ltd. v.Torque Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.
Emami Ltd. vs Torque Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. saw its multi-faceted IP litigation reach a conclusion through settlement in the Calcutta High Court. The original suit, which involved claims of infringement across trademark, copyright, design, and passing off, was formally withdrawn by both parties. The court accepted the Terms of Settlement, decreeing the parent suit and disposing of all connected applications. This resolution allows both companies to move forward without further legal entanglement.
Hakimuddin Bhemat v.Mahaveer Prasad Agarwal And Anr.
The Calcutta High Court granted an interim injunction protecting the petitioner's intellectual property rights related to fertiliser sprayers. The court found that the respondents were using a virtually identical packaging and trade dress, including the word 'Bharat Shakti,' which amounted to deceiving the public. Consequently, the respondents were restrained from making such imitations, and a Receiver was appointed to inventory the infringing products.
Biswanath Hosiery Mills Limited & Anr v.Micky Metals Limited
The Calcutta High Court dismissed the plaintiffs' interim application seeking protection for their trademark 'LUX'. Despite presenting evidence of long-standing use, massive sales figures, and international presence, the court found insufficient grounds to grant relief at the interim stage. The judgment noted that the mark 'LUX' has been used by various entities and pointed to prior legal challenges regarding its registration, ultimately finding no compelling reason to favor the plaintiffs.
Yasmin Khalique And Ors. v.Mukhtar Alam
This Calcutta High Court judgment addresses an appeal concerning a partnership dissolution and the associated registered trademark, 'Musa ka gul'. While the core dispute involves the validity of the arbitration award dissolving the firm, the court specifically addressed the use of the valuable trademark. The court clarified that ownership rights are not its immediate concern but issued a crucial interim order preventing either party from transferring or assigning any rights related to the mark until the appeal is finally decided.
Emami Limited v.Hindustan Unilever Limited
In a trademark dispute concerning the use of 'Handsome' and 'Glow and Handsome,' Emami Limited sought an injunction against Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) in the Calcutta High Court. However, Emami decided to withdraw its current application (GA No.3/2021), stating that it had filed a substantially similar application earlier (GA No.2/2020). The court granted leave for withdrawal and directed that the original, pending application (GA No.2/2020) be taken up for hearing on July 5, 2021.
Ganesh Grains Ltd. v.Ganesh Department Stores
Ganesh Grains Ltd. filed a suit against Ganesh Department Stores seeking urgent interim relief under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The court admitted the plaint subject to departmental scrutiny and granted leave for interim protection in the infringement and passing off suit.
Khaitan India Limited v.Khaitar Industries Private Limited & Anr.
The plaintiff filed a suit claiming infringement of its distinctive trade mark 'Khaitan' and passing off against the defendants, who used the similar mark 'Khaitar'. The defendant sought dismissal, arguing that since the defendant also possessed a registered trademark, the suit for infringement was not maintainable. The court ultimately dismissed the interlocutory application seeking dismissal.
Emami Ltd v.Torque Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.
The defendant filed an application seeking modification of a previous interim order. The court observed that the suit involved infringement and passing off and was valued in excess of the specified limit. Consequently, the case (IN EOS/4/2020) and the associated application (IA GA 1 of 2021) were transferred to the Commercial Division.
Grand Tobacco Private Limited v.Abdul Rashid Shaikh Tobaco, A Limited Liability Partnership & Ors.
The plaintiff, Grand Tobacco Private Limited, filed an application seeking interim protection against the defendant for infringement of its registered trademark and passing off. The court found a prima facie case existed, noting that the defendant was using a deceptively similar mark ('A.R.S Chand Tara Marka') and color combination on tobacco products compared to the plaintiff's mark ('Super Chand Tara Marka').
Torque Pharmaceuticals Private Limited v.Emami Limited
This order sheet details an application filed by Emami Limited seeking the transfer of a title suit from the Additional District Judge to the Calcutta High Court. The original suit involved allegations of infringement concerning trademark, passing off, copyright, and design against Torque Pharmaceuticals Private Limited. Citing Clause 13 of the Letters Patent, 1865, and Section 22(4) of the Designs Act, 2000, the court allowed the transfer application.
Arg Outlier Media Asianet News Private Limited v.Shailputri Media Private Limited
The Calcutta High Court granted interim protection to Arg Outlier Media Asianet News Private Limited in a passing off suit against Shailputri Media Private Limited. The court found that the defendant's use of 'Republic Hindi,' coupled with similar font and color schemes, was deceptively similar to the plaintiff's established mark, 'Republic TV.' Despite arguments regarding the generic nature of the word 'Republic,' the court prioritized the visual similarity and prior usage by the plaintiff, granting the requested injunction.
Shyam Steel Industries Limited v.Shyam Sel And Power Limited & Anr.
This Calcutta High Court judgment addresses a trademark infringement and passing off suit filed by Shyam Steel Industries Limited against Shyam Sel And Power Limited. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were exploiting its reputation by using 'Shyam' on their TMT bar packaging, despite previous agreements to phase out the mark. However, the court noted the defendant's claim of honest adoption and the common nature of the word 'Shyam'. Consequently, the court declined to grant an immediate injunction but allowed the defendants time to file a detailed affidavit-in-opposition.
Dystar Colours Distribution Gmbh v.Jay Chemical Industries Ltd
The plaintiff filed a suit seeking interim protection for infringement of a patent. The court noted that the defendant had already filed its written statement and decided to expedite the hearing process.
Shambhu Nath & Brothers & Ors. v.Usha International Limited
In this trademark dispute, Shambhu Nath & Brothers successfully secured a favorable outcome against Usha International Limited. The respondent company voluntarily agreed to withdraw its application for the trademark 'TOOFAN' and provided an affidavit undertaking that it would neither use nor register the mark, or any similar mark, in the future. Consequently, the court disposed of the suit based on this binding commitment.
Pan Seeds Pvt. Ltd. v.M/S. Kishan Green Field Agritech & Ors.
In this trademark and copyright infringement suit, the defendants challenged the court's jurisdiction over the case. The Calcutta High Court did not immediately rule on the jurisdictional challenge but instead granted the plaintiff an opportunity to file a detailed affidavit in opposition. Furthermore, the court directed the defendants to disclose all sales accounts related to the 'DOUBLE PAAN' trademark from the date of filing, ensuring that the core issues of infringement and jurisdiction would be addressed thoroughly.
M/S. Lucky Exports v.The Controller Of Patents And Designs & Ors.
M/S. Lucky Exports challenged an order rejecting its appeal against the cancellation of Design No. 202108, which covered a 'Coaster Brake Sub Assembly'. The core dispute revolved around whether this mechanical component was purely functional and therefore ineligible for design registration, or if it possessed sufficient aesthetic features to qualify. The court examined arguments regarding prior publication and novelty, ultimately allowing the appeal by setting aside the impugned order.
International Cycle Gears v.The Controller Of Patents And Designs & Ors.
The petitioner appealed against the Controller's order allowing the cancellation of Design No. 201728 for a 'Coaster Brake Hub'. The appeal argued that the design was significantly different from known models, particularly those published in February 2005. However, the High Court upheld the Controller's finding, concluding that the design lacked novelty and originality as it was substantially identical to prior publications.
Shyam Steel Industries Limited v.Shyam Sel And Power Limited & Anr.
Shyam Steel Industries Limited filed a suit against Shyam Sel And Power Limited & Anr. alleging infringement of trademark and passing off. The Calcutta High Court accepted the plaint, noting that no leave was required under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865. Given concerns about potential concealment of infringing products, the court dispensed with mediation provisions.
Srmb Srijan Private Limited v.Shreegopal Concrete Private Limited
The Calcutta High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Srmb Srijan Private Limited against Shreegopal Concrete Private Limited. The dispute centered on the 'X-Ribs' surface pattern used on TMT bars, which the plaintiff claimed constituted a distinctive trade dress and trademark acquired through long use and extensive marketing. The court found a strong prima facie case for passing off, noting that the defendant was using an identical imitation of the plaintiff's unique product indicia. This ruling reinforces the protection afforded to unregistered trade dress when demonstrating consumer association.
Shambhu Nath & Brothers & Ors. v.Imran Khan
In the case concerning the trademark 'SNJ TOOFAN', the defendant, Imran Khan, filed an affidavit affirming that he has ceased using the mark and undertakes not to use it in the future. The court accepted this submission, allowing the matter to proceed while granting time for the plaintiffs to take instructions. This indicates a potential path toward resolution through settlement or compliance.
Simon, S. A. U. v.The Controller Of Patent & Designs & Anr.
Simon filed three applications for the registration of a design related to 'Accessories For Electrical Devices', claiming priority from a Spanish application. The Controller found that the design lacked novelty because it was taught by earlier, prior published designs and compared unfavorably with Registered Design No. 216507.
Shree Vari Multiplast India Pvt. Ltd v.Deputy Controller Of Patents & Designs
The petitioner challenged the registration of Design No. 242843 (Sunday Chair) on grounds that it lacked novelty or originality as it resembled known designs. The respondent argued that the design was unique, aesthetically pleasing, and distinct from prior art. The High Court upheld the Deputy Controller's order, finding the registered design to be novel and original.
Jasper Motors Private Limited And Another v.The Proprietor, Basantee Battery Operated Rickshaw and Others
The applicant (Defendant No.2) filed an application seeking recall of a prior injunction order, arguing that the plaintiff's patent was invalid based on grounds like prior art and lack of inventive step under Section 64 of the Patents Act. The court found prima facie satisfaction regarding the patent's invalidity and noted the defendant's manufacturing activity, leading to the recall of the interim order.
Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. v.Habiganj Agro Ltd. & Anr.
The Calcutta High Court upheld the interim injunction granted to Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. against Habiganj Agro Ltd., finding that the defendants failed to establish a compelling case for vacating the order. Despite arguments regarding 'proposed to be used' status and prior ownership claims, the court noted evidence of slavish imitation in the defendants' packaging materials. The interim injunction remains active for 16 weeks while the main suit proceeds.
Hakimuddin Bhemat v.Perfect Agro
The Calcutta High Court addressed a dispute concerning alleged trademark infringement involving Hakimuddin Bhemat and Perfect Agro. The court heard submissions from various parties, including an added respondent (Respondent No. 2), who claimed they were merely acting as intermediaries based on requisitions from Defendant No. 1. To clarify the supply chain, Respondent No. 2 was directed to file an affidavit disclosing the identities of third-party suppliers. Furthermore, Respondent No. 2 provided an undertaking that they would cease using the plaintiff's trademark, while deadlines for other parties were extended.
Klassic Wheels Private Ltd v.The Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs and Anr.
The petitioner filed an appeal challenging the cancellation of Design No. 229267, which covered a 'Wheel Rim' design. The grounds for cancellation were lack of novelty and prior publication. The court dismissed both the appeal and the application for additional evidence.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.R-3 Organics Limited
The Calcutta High Court granted an interim protective order in favor of Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) against R-3 Organics Limited. HUL alleged that the respondent was manufacturing and selling detergent powder under 'PARAS STAIN FIGHTER' with labels deceptively similar to HUL's well-known trademark 'SURF EXCEL.' The court found a prima facie case of infringement regarding both the registered trade mark and the copyright in the distinctive getup and color scheme, leading to an order for inventory and seizure of infringing goods.
Saregama Ltd v.The New Digital Media & Ors.
Saregama Ltd filed a suit alleging copyright infringement against The New Digital Media & Ors. concerning fifteen songs from various films. Saregama claimed absolute ownership of the sound recordings and underlying works based on assignment agreements predating 1994, asserting that they held the rights to digital exploitation. The court examined the validity of these pre-amendment assignments and the scope of the infringement claims. Ultimately, the interim injunction was modified: usage was restricted for three specific films, while the injunction was lifted for eight others, requiring those defendants to account for all revenue generated.
Mutha Brothers & Ors v.Arjun Singh Rajguru & Ors
The Calcutta High Court addressed a suit concerning trademark infringement and passing off involving the marks 'RADIUM' and 'SPEED RADIUM'. The petitioners successfully established a strong prima facie case, demonstrating that the respondents were imitating their unique artistic get-up, color combination, and layout on packaging. Consequently, the court granted an interim order, appointing a Special Officer to inventory the infringing products while the main litigation proceeds.
Abp News Network Private Limited & Anr v.Pobi Infrastructure Private Limited & ...
The Calcutta High Court decreed a suit filed by ABP News Network against Pobi Infrastructure, resolving the dispute through an amicable out-of-court settlement. The defendants acknowledged that the mark "Shera Bangali" is a well-known trademark of the plaintiffs and committed not to use it for their upcoming or future film ventures. This judgment underscores the importance of pre-litigation settlements in IP disputes involving brand reputation.
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.