Delhi High Court - Orders
2164 cases · page 25 of 73
Showing 721–749Shenzhen Hottech Electronics Co Ltd v.The Registrar Of Trademarks, Trade Marks Registry, New Delhi
The Delhi High Court overturned a trademark refusal order in favor of Shenzhen Hottech Electronics Co Ltd. The appeal was based on the fundamental principle of natural justice, as the appellant claimed they were never properly served with the Show Cause Notice before the Examiner's hearing. Citing established legal precedents, the court held that administrative bodies exercising quasi-judicial functions must afford parties a fair opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the refusal order was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the Registrar of Trademarks for fresh consideration after granting due process.
Pramit Sanghavi v.Energy Beverages Private Limited
The Delhi High Court addressed an application seeking an ad-interim ex-parte injunction in a suit concerning design infringement. The plaintiff, Pramit Sanghavi (representing market leaders in packaged natural mineral water), alleged that the defendant was imitating their registered bottle designs (Nos. 281573 and 311139) for their product "NU". After considering the prima facie case, irreparable harm, and balance of convenience, the Court granted an interim injunction to protect the plaintiffs' intellectual property rights.
Pfizer Inc v.The Deputy Controller Of Patents And Designs and Anr
Pfizer Inc has filed an appeal against the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs' order dated March 27, 2024, which refused to grant a patent. Pfizer contends that the refusal was arbitrary, incorrectly concluding that the subject matter lacked technical advancement or failed Section 3(d) requirements.
Varun Chopra & Anr. v.Shyam Sunder Chopra Sons Huf & Ors.
The Delhi High Court addressed several interlocutory applications in the trademark infringement suit filed by Varun Chopra against Shyam Sunder Chopra Sons Huf. The court allowed the main suit to proceed after resolving jurisdictional issues and granting various procedural exemptions, including those related to document filing and advance service. Crucially, the court referred the dispute to mediation, encouraging the parties to explore an amicable settlement despite the clear allegations of passing off and trademark infringement.
Spread Home Products Pvt. Ltd v.Homescapes @ Kesri Transcontinental
The Delhi High Court granted interim relief to Spread Home Products Pvt. Ltd in its suit against Homescapes @ Kesri Transcontinental regarding the alleged infringement of 'DOCTOR PILLOW'. The court allowed an ex-parte appointment of a Local Commissioner to conduct a search and seizure at the defendant's premises, aiming to gather evidence of counterfeit products. Furthermore, the court granted exemptions from pre-institution mediation and condoned a delay in filing the suit, paving the way for the main litigation.
Immersion Corporation v.Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited
The case involves a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of the plaintiff's patent titled 'Haptic Feedback System with Stored Effects', along with claims for damages and rendition of accounts. An amicable resolution was reached between the parties during the proceedings.
Spv Laboratories Private Limited v.The Controller General Of Patents And Designs
Spv Laboratories Private Limited filed an appeal challenging the order dated June 14, 2024, issued by the Assistant Controller. The refusal was based on non-compliance with requirements under Section 60(3) of the Patents Act, 1970, due to failure to pay the renewal fee within the statutory period.
Radha Kishan Agarwal & Anr. v.M/S Ignyt Electricals
The Delhi High Court addressed an appeal filed by Radha Kishan Agarwal & Anr. challenging a Commercial Court order that had restricted their use of the trademark 'IGNYT' due to alleged infringement on M/S Ignyt Electricals' registered mark 'IGNYT'. The appellants argued they were merely distributors of genuine goods and sought permission to sell their existing stock. While the High Court noted procedural gaps in the lower court's decision, it deferred a final ruling on the stay application, listing the matter for further instructions from both parties.
Zuventus Healthcare Limited v.Zaventis Health Care Private Limited
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Zuventus Healthcare Limited against Zaventis Health Care Private Limited. The court found that the defendant's mark, 'ZAVENTIS HEALTH CARE,' was visually, structurally, and phonetically similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark 'ZUVENTUS,' leading to a prima facie case of infringement and passing off. This order allows the suit to proceed while restraining the defendant from using any deceptively similar branding in relation to pharmaceutical products.
Phillip Morris Produts S A v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Design
Phillip Morris Produts S A has filed an appeal challenging the Assistant Controller's order refusing to grant a patent for its application (No. 201617028283). The refusal was based on the ground that the invention is not patentable under Section 3(b) of the Patents Act, specifically concerning E-cigarettes.
M/S Jay Plastic Company & Ors. v.M/S. Gurunanak Enterprises & Ors.
The Delhi High Court issued a significant interim order in the trade dress and trademark infringement suit filed by M/S Jay Plastic Company against M/S. Gurunanak Enterprises. The court granted the plaintiffs' request for an immediate local commission, allowing a Local Commissioner to search the defendants' premises and seize goods bearing deceptively similar packaging and marks (SPARROW vs ARROW). This decisive step allows the plaintiffs to gather crucial evidence of infringement and unfair competition while the main suit proceeds.
Woodland (Aero Club) Pvt. Ltd v.M/S Triad Shoes
The Delhi High Court granted several interim reliefs in favor of Woodland (Aero Club) Pvt. Ltd, which is pursuing a suit against M/S Triad Shoes for trademark infringement and passing off. The court allowed the plaintiff to proceed without mandatory pre-litigation mediation and exempted them from advance service requirements. Crucially, the court passed an urgent ex-parte ad-interim injunction, authorizing a Local Commissioner to conduct a search and seizure at the defendant's premises to gather evidence of alleged infringing goods.
Nord Lock Ab v.Gala Precision Engineering Private Limited
The plaintiffs filed an application seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants, alleging that the defendants were infringing two registered patents related to the manufacture of washers. The court issued notice and directed that if the defendants file a suit challenging the validity or non-infringement of these patents, it must be done within the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court.
Castrol Limited v.Kapil & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted an urgent interim injunction to Castrol Limited in its suit against Kapil & Anr., allowing the plaintiff to proceed with an ex-parte local commission. The court recognized that the defendants were allegedly manufacturing and selling counterfeit engine oils, infringing on Castrol's trademarks, trade dress, and copyrights related to their packaging. This order permits a search and seizure operation at the defendants' premises to gather evidence of infringement.
Arcelormittal Investigacion Y Desarrollo SL v.The Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs
Arcelormittal Investigacion Y Desarrollo SL appealed against an impugned order dated February 20, 2024, passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. The original order refused to grant a patent for Indian Patent Application No. 1908/DELNP/2015, citing lack of full disclosure and technical advancement. The High Court noted the submissions and directed parties to file replies.
Schneider Electric It Corporation v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs
Schneider Electric It Corporation appealed an order by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs which rejected the grant of a patent application (No. 6134/DELNP/2015). The rejection was based on the alleged lack of inventive constructional features and failure to meet novelty and inventive step criteria. The court issued notice and directed both parties to file written submissions.
Jk Lakshmi Cement Limited v.Mr Satyawan Sehrawat & Anr.
The Delhi High Court decreed a suit filed by Jk Lakshmi Cement Limited against Mr Satyawan Sehrawat & Anr. following a successful out-of-court settlement. Defendant No. 1 acknowledged infringing the plaintiff's trademark rights and wrongly using 'J.K. Lakshmi Cement RMC'. The court formalized the agreement, which required the defendant to cease the wrongful use and surrender its GST registration obtained under the disputed trade name.
Waterways Leisure Tourism Private Limited v.Ashok Kumar And Others
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Waterways Leisure Tourism Private Limited against Ashok Kumar and others. The court found a prima facie case that the respondents were illegally imitating, impersonating, and infringing upon the petitioner's registered trademarks ('Cordelia Cruises') and copyrighted material related to its cruise services. The order specifically restrained the defendants from using the plaintiff's marks across all media platforms and directed the blocking of an offending website until the final hearing.
Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc. v.The Controller Of Patents
The Appellant, Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., filed an appeal challenging the refusal of its Indian Patent Application No. 201617008869 by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Designs. The High Court issued notice and set a date for re-notification to hear the matter.
Ashim Gujral v.Moti Mahal Delux Management Services Private Limited & Anr.
Ashim Gujral has initiated legal action against Moti Mahal Delux Management Services regarding the registration of the trademark 'MOTI MAHAL GROUP'. The petitioner asserts co-ownership of the 'MOTI MAHAL' mark and claims that Respondent No. 1 obtained the impugned registration by making false statements, relying on the petitioner's rights without consent. The court has issued notice to both parties, setting the stage for formal opposition proceedings.
Roppen Transportation Services Private Limited v.Mr. Nipun Gupta & Anr.
Roppen Transportation Services Private Limited filed a petition seeking the removal of an allegedly infringing trademark, 'RAPIDO' (No. 4459206), registered in Class 39. The Delhi High Court proceeded with issuing notice to all permissible parties, setting the matter for return on September 24, 2024. While procedural applications regarding document filing were addressed, the core dispute over trademark cancellation is now moving forward.
Ranjit Prasad Mathuri v.Gopal Choudhary & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of the plaintiff, Ranjit Prasad Mathuri, against the defendants. The court found that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case for trademark infringement concerning his 'GS GULAB BIDI 755' mark. This immediate relief restrains the defendants from manufacturing or dealing in bidis using marks identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered trade mark, pending further proceedings.
Malhotra Surgical Industries v.Dharam Pal Singh Bhatia & Anr.
In this trademark infringement matter, the Delhi High Court issued interim directions concerning the online sale of 'MICROTONE' products. While the defendant undertook not to sell or distribute the impugned goods, the plaintiff noted that the products remained available on various e-commerce platforms. Consequently, the court directed both parties to file detailed affidavits—the plaintiff detailing current infringing listings and the defendants naming all distributors—to allow for further appropriate judicial action.
Jrpl Riceland Llp v.Crop India Agro Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction favoring Jrpl Riceland LLP against Crop India Agro Pvt Ltd. The court found that the Defendant's subsequent adoption of a deceptively similar trademark ('2') for rice constituted passing off, given the Plaintiff's established goodwill and senior user status with their mark ('9090'). This interim relief prevents the defendant from using the infringing mark while the main suit proceeds.
Radico Khaitan Ltd v.Superior Industries Ltd
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of Radico Khaitan Ltd against Superior Industries Ltd. The court found that the Defendant's use of 'GREAT GRAND MASTI' for alcoholic beverages was highly likely to cause confusion and constitute trademark infringement or passing off against the Plaintiff's established mark, 'MASTIH'. This interim order immediately restricts the defendant from manufacturing or selling products bearing the impugned marks until the final hearing.
Incyte Holdings Corporation v.Lotus Labs Private Limited
The plaintiffs filed a commercial suit alleging infringement of their Indian Patent No. 269841, which covers the compound 'Ruxolitinib'. The court granted an exemption from advance service based on the apprehension that Defendants might flood the market with infringing products before formal service could occur.
Incyte Holdings Corporation v.Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited
Incyte Holdings Corporation filed a quia timet action against Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited alleging impending infringement of its patent (IN2698411) covering the compound 'Ruxolitinib'. The parties reached an agreement where the defendant undertook not to commercially manufacture or deal in products containing Ruxolitinib during the patent's validity, and the suit was disposed of on these consent terms.
M/S Nakoda Food Marketing & Ors. v.M/S Mahesh Edible Oil Industries Limited
The Delhi High Court addressed an application filed by the respondent seeking interim relief in a trademark dispute. The court noted that while the respondent's mark is registered and well-known, the appellants' mark was unregistered and had previously been withdrawn from registration. Consequently, the court declined to grant any ad interim order at this stage but directed the appellants to file detailed documentation regarding their prior use and application history for future consideration.
Ds Agrifoods Private Limited v.M/S Singhal Enterprises & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim ex-parte injunction in favor of Ds Agrifoods Private Limited against M/S Singhal Enterprises & Ors. The court found that the Defendant's use of the mark 'DOODMALAI' and its associated trade dress was deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's established trademark 'DOONMALAI'. Given the phonetic, visual, and structural similarity, coupled with a prior business relationship suggesting bad faith, the court ruled that the Defendants were passing off their goods. This interim order protects the Plaintiff's market standing until the final hearing.
Tata Sia Airlines Limited v.Vistara Property Services Llp
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction in favor of Tata Sia Airlines Limited against Vistara Property Services Llp. The court found that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case regarding trademark infringement, specifically concerning the use of 'VISTARA GETAWAYS' and similar marks by the defendant across various online platforms. This immediate relief aims to prevent irreparable harm while the main suit proceeds.
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.