Madras High Court
1345 cases · page 26 of 45
Showing 751–779Cadbury India Limited v.Gomathi Suresh
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by Cadbury India Limited seeking to expunge Trademark No. 1050347 from the register. The court noted that the primary respondent, Gomathi Suresh, submitted that the trademark in question had already expired on October 8, 2021. Consequently, since the mark was no longer active, the petition became infructuous and was dismissed without further adjudication.
T.G.Arumugam v.T.G.Harigopal
The Madras High Court addressed a petition seeking rectification of the trademark 'UMBRELLA BAND' registration. The court noted that the dispute had been resolved through a joint memorandum of compromise, which was subsequently decreed by a lower court. Consequently, the High Court directed the Trademark Registry to allow applications filed under Form TM-P and Form TM-M, thereby officially recording the petitioner as a joint proprietor alongside the respondent. Furthermore, the registry was mandated to implement the agreed geographical division of territory.
Kiri Industries Limited v.Huntsman Advanced Material (Switzerland) GMBH, The Controller of Patents, The Controller of Patents & Design
Kiri Industries Limited filed an Original Petition seeking revocation of Patent No. 216182, granted to Huntsman Advanced Material for 'AN AZO DYE'. The petitioner subsequently informed the court that it was withdrawing the rectification petition.
Chivas Holdings (Ip) Limited v.Mcdowell And Company Limited
The Madras High Court allowed Chivas Holdings' petition seeking the removal and rectification of a conflicting trademark registration, 'Tribute,' in Class 33. The court noted that Respondent No. 2 (United Spirits Limited) had filed an application for cancellation of this specific mark. Consequently, the court directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to rectify the register by removing Trademark Registration No. 636945 from the records.
Solera Holdings, Inc. v.Solera Networks Inc.
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by Solera Holdings, Inc. seeking the cancellation of Trademark No. 1795016 registered in the name of Solera Networks Inc. The court noted that the trademark registration had already expired on March 13, 2019. Consequently, since the mark was no longer valid, the petition became infructuous and was dismissed without any order regarding costs.
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd v.Natco Pharma Limited
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd filed a petition seeking the revocation of Patent No. 236791 from the patent register. However, the petitioner subsequently instructed their counsel to withdraw the petition.
World Of God Fellowship Inc./d/b/a/Daystar Television Network v.Daystar Television Network India Pvt. Ltd.; Registrar of Trademarks, Trademarks Registry, Chennai
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition seeking the removal and rectification of the trademark 'DAYSTAR TELEVISION NETWORK' from the register. The petitioners argued that the first respondent company had been struck off the Register of Companies and that the impugned trademark ceased to be valid after June 25, 2017. Given these developments, the court found the petition to be infructuous.
N.Mariappan v.S.A.Safiullah and Co.
N.Mariappan filed an appeal seeking revocation of Patent No.198079, arguing that the invention lacked inventive step and was not patentable. The first respondent submitted that the relevant patent had already expired on August 28, 2020.
Ashique Exports (P) Ltd. v.Suresh K.K.
Ashique Exports (P) Ltd. filed an appeal challenging a lower court's judgment regarding trademark infringement and passing off related to its 'Super Wash – 555' washing soap. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants were using identical wrappers to deceive the public. However, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeal, primarily finding that the Plaintiff failed to prove prior use due to the inadmissibility of photocopied documents. Furthermore, the court held that the suit lacked territorial jurisdiction as the defendants' business was not within the court's limits.
ashok kumar sethi v.amazon technologies inc
Ashok Kumar Sethi and another sued Amazon Technologies Inc. for copyright infringement and passing off related to Henna Hair Colour products sold via Amazon's internet platform, alleging the use of identical labels 'Black Gold and Amin's'. The plaintiffs claimed significant advertising costs and a long-standing business presence under the trademark since 1993.
M/s.Vicky Industries v.Sh.J.Pradeed; The Registrar of Trade Marks
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by M/s. Vicky Industries seeking the removal or rectification of the trademark 'TULASI LABEL' (No. 1783253). The court noted that the term of the impugned trademark had expired on February 10, 2019. Consequently, the petition was deemed infructuous, though the petitioner was granted leave to re-apply should the mark be restored.
Groupe Seb India Private Limited v.Sumit Bafna Trading As: B & J Marketing
Groupe Seb India Private Limited filed a petition seeking the removal or rectification of the trademark 'MAHARAJA WHITELINE' from the register, citing issues related to its validity. However, the Madras High Court ultimately dismissed the petition because the impugned trademark registration number 921351 had already expired on April 28, 2020. This ruling highlights the critical importance of monitoring the expiry dates of intellectual property rights.
M.Raja Mohamed v.The Registrar of Trademarks
The Madras High Court addressed a long-pending writ petition filed by M.Raja Mohamed seeking the restoration of his trademark, 'RAJA SUPARI.' The court did not delve into the merits of the case but issued a Mandamus directing the Registrar of Trademarks to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.03.2017 and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks. This order effectively moves the matter forward for substantive consideration by the Trademark Registry.
A.Arjun v.Balaji B
A.Arjun filed an application seeking leave from the Madras High Court to sue Balaji B for copyright infringement and passing off related to artistic work used on garments. The respondent challenged the court's jurisdiction, arguing that both parties operate primarily in Madurai, despite alleged online sales in Chennai.
Vedant Fashions Private Limited v.Rajul Devi Trading As Manyavar
The Madras High Court addressed petitions filed by Vedant Fashions Private Limited seeking the rectification of registered trademarks held by Rajul Devi Trading As Manyavar. The court noted that the dispute between the parties had been resolved through an out-of-court settlement agreement dated April 1, 2019. Consequently, both petitions were closed without any formal order regarding costs.
Hyundai Motor India Limited v.Varna Homes Pvt. Ltd.
In a case concerning trademark disputes, Hyundai Motor India Limited sought the removal and rectification of Varna Homes Pvt. Ltd.'s trademarks from the register. The Madras High Court noted that the parties had reached a comprehensive settlement agreement. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn, directing the Registrar of Trade Marks to implement specific amendments to the service descriptions in both trademarks within four weeks.
Sankalp Rehabilitation Trust v.M/s.Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp.
Sankalp Rehabilitation Trust filed two Original Petitions seeking the revocation and removal of Patents No. 207233 and 234103, both held by M/s. Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp., in the Madras High Court. The petitioner sought to transfer these matters for adjudication regarding patent invalidity. However, the court noted that both patents had already expired on March 24, 2019. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed as infructuous.
Rajeev Hiremath v.The Controller of Patents & Designs
Rajeev Hiremath filed an appeal challenging the Controller's refusal to register specific claims (1-12) under Application No. 201741023631. However, on the date of judgment, the appellant withdrew the appeal.
Haryana Pesticides Manufactures' Association v.Nippon Soda Co. Ltd
The petitioner filed an Original Petition seeking the revocation/cancellation of Indian Patent No. 268448 related to a method of producing granular agrochemical composition. However, the petitioner subsequently informed the court that they intended to withdraw the petition without prejudice to their rights.
Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v.ICOS Corporation of Eli Lilly and Company; The Controller of Patents
Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd filed an Original Petition seeking the revocation of Indian Patent No. 235242 before the Madras High Court. The court noted that the patent had already expired on April 26, 2016.
Monsanto Technology Llc v.Union Of India
Monsanto Technology LLC challenged the rejection of its patent application (No. 6560/CHENP/2008) by the Patent Office. The court found that the impugned order breached principles of natural justice because it referenced sections and paragraphs (like Section 10(4)(a), (b), (c) and paragraph 53) that were neither in the First Examination Report nor in the subsequent hearing notice.
Radhakrishna Adiga v.M/s.Vasudeva Adigas Fast Foods Pvt Ltd
The Madras High Court dismissed a series of petitions filed by Radhakrishna Adiga against M/s. Vasudeva Adigas Fast Foods Pvt Ltd and the Registrar of Trademarks. The original petitions sought the removal or rectification of several trademarks registered under the name 'Vasudeva Adigas Fast Food Pvt Ltd.' However, the court noted that the petitioner had been instructed to withdraw all cases due to a settlement reached between the contesting parties.
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited v.Indian Institute of Science
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited filed a petition seeking the revocation or rectification of Patent No. 229283, alleging it was invalid and obtained by misrepresentation. The court noted that the patent had not been renewed and its term had expired.
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited v.Indian Institute of Science
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited filed a petition seeking revocation of Patent No. 229283, alleging it was invalid and obtained through misrepresentation. The court noted that the document indicated the patent had not been renewed and its term had expired.
Lakshmi Ring Travellers (Coimbatore) Limited v.Bracker Ag
Lakshmi Ring Travellers filed a petition seeking the revocation of Patent No. 212183 held by Bracker Ag. The court noted that the term of the impugned patent had already ended on March 26, 2015.
Mrs.Veena Kumaravel v.Union Of India
Mrs. Veena Kumaravel challenged the abandonment of her trademark application, 'Natural's @,' before the Madras High Court. The petitioner sought to quash the public notice that treated her mark as abandoned under Section 21(2) of the Trade Marks Act. However, the case was ultimately dismissed because the Central Government subsequently withdrew the order of mass abandonment that formed the basis of the challenge.
Shaik Nazeemuddin v.Mohammed Aslam; Registrar of Trademarks
Shaik Nazeemuddin filed two petitions before the Madras High Court seeking the removal and cancellation of trademarks 'BRIGHT ROCK' and 'BRIGHT' registered by Mohammed Aslam. The petitioner sought to maintain the purity of the trademark register. However, shortly after filing, the petitioner instructed his counsel to withdraw both cases. Consequently, the court dismissed (T)OP(TM)Nos. 288 & 289 of 2023 as withdrawn without making any order regarding costs.
Premier Airways Limited v.Easy Group Ltd
The Madras High Court dismissed the petition filed by Premier Airways Limited seeking the removal of a trademark belonging to Easy Group Ltd. The court noted that the petitioner company had been struck off the Register of Companies, meaning it no longer existed as a juristic entity. Consequently, the court found the petition infructuous and dismissed it without making any order regarding costs.
M/S.D.R.Raanka Bros. v.Mr.Om Prakash
The Madras High Court dismissed the trademark infringement suit filed by M/S.D.R.Raanka Bros against Mr. Om Prakash. The court found that despite both parties operating in the silver jewelry trade, the defendant's use of 'D.R.R.' alongside descriptive words ('Shri Mahalakshmi Velli Maligai') did not constitute infringement or passing off of the plaintiff's registered marks like 'D.R.RAANKA'. The judgment emphasized that a marked difference in trading style prevents consumer confusion.
A.D.Padmasingh Issac (Trading as Aachi Spices and Foods) v.Hariharan (Trading as Sruthi's Masala) & The Registrar of Trademarks
The Madras High Court dismissed the petition filed by A.D. Padmasingh Issac seeking the removal or rectification of Trademark No. 1759431 from the Register of Trademarks. The court noted that, subsequent to filing the suit, the trademark in question had already been removed from the register. Since the relief sought was no longer necessary due to this prior action, the petition was declared infructuous.
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.