Madras High Court
1365 cases · page 32 of 46
Showing 931–959Indcon Structurals Pvt. Ltd. v.Beton Tile Company, Iqbal, Nazmuddin, Mr. Huzaiffa Zoeb, Mrs. Bani Mufaddal, Mr. Kuzema Zainuddin, Indian Ceramic Company, Ali Akbar
The plaintiff, Indcon Structurals Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against a trial court judgment after losing a suit for permanent injunction and rendition of accounts. The suit alleged that the defendants were passing off their imitation tiles under the name 'Diana', confusing the public regarding the plaintiff's unique tile 'MONALISA'.
M/s.Bahwan Cyber Tek Pvt. Ltd. v.Aptivaa Consulting Solutions Private Limited
The Madras High Court formally accepted a Joint Memo of Compromise between M/s.Bahwan Cyber Tek Pvt. Ltd. and its defendants regarding trademark infringement concerning 'ASYMMETRIX EARLY WARNING SYSTEM'. The parties agreed that the defendants would cease all use, display, or advertising of the disputed mark in relation to software products. In exchange, the plaintiff waived most other reliefs sought in the suit, leading the court to decree the case based on the terms of the compromise.
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s.Amman Trader
This Madras High Court judgment addressed a trademark dispute where M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited sought permanent injunctions against M/s.Amman Trader for infringing its registered mark 'DHEEPAM' by using 'SRI DEEPAM' on edible oil products, and for passing off inferior goods as the plaintiff's. The parties ultimately reached a Joint Compromise Memo, which was accepted and decreed by the court. This settlement ensures that the defendant will cease all infringing activities related to the plaintiff's brand.
A.R.Safiullah v.Sri Ayyappan Fine Arts
A.R.Safiullah filed a civil suit against Sri Ayyappan Fine Arts and others, alleging infringement of his intellectual property rights. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions based on Patent No. 198079 (for food-grade laminated paper) and Design No. 182931 (for artificial laminated banana leaves). Furthermore, the suit claimed passing off related to trade dress imitation. However, before a final judgment could be delivered, the plaintiff formally withdrew the civil suit.
A.R.Safiullah v.Sri Ayyappan Fine Arts
A.R.Safiullah filed a civil suit against Sri Ayyappan Fine Arts and others, alleging infringement of his intellectual property rights. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions based on Patent No. 198079 (for food-grade laminated paper) and Design No. 182931 (for artificial laminated banana leaves), as well as claims of passing off. However, before the court could rule on the merits of the infringement claims, the plaintiff formally withdrew the civil suit.
Minbimbangal Productions (P) Ltd and E9 Intrakt v.Harshini Movies
Minbimbangal Productions (P) Ltd filed a suit against Harshini Movies seeking permanent injunctions under the Trademarks Act, 1999, and the Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiffs sought to prevent the defendant from using the title 'Vidathu Karuppu' or any deceptively similar title for their motion picture. However, subsequent developments revealed that the defendant had changed the name of their film to 'Shenbaga Kottai', leading the plaintiffs to withdraw the suit.
Minbimbangal Productions (P) Ltd v.Harshini Movies
Minbimbangal Productions (P) Ltd filed a suit against Harshini Movies seeking permanent injunction to prevent the use of the title 'Vidathu Karuppu' or any deceptively similar title for its motion picture. The plaintiffs had previously secured an interim injunction regarding this matter. However, subsequent developments revealed that the defendant had changed the name of their film to 'Shenbaga Kottai'. Consequently, the plaintiffs filed a memo stating that they were not pressing the suit further, leading the court to dismiss the case as not prosecuted.
M/s.Kumbhat Holographics v.The Government Of Tamil Nadu
The appellants challenged the tender terms set by the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd for producing polyester based hologram excise labels. They argued that the technical specifications favored a specific patented technology, leading to limited participation and vitiating the public tendering process. The High Court found merit in this challenge, quashing the tender but allowing Uflex (the awarded vendor) to continue work temporarily.
R.Ravindran v.M.Anandan
R.Ravindran appealed against an order concerning his rights as assignee of the copyright in a story related to the film 'Chakra'. The court dismissed both appeals, noting that while the primary finding regarding his arbitration application was accepted, the dismissal did not preclude him from asserting other legal causes of action.
Bharat Balar and White Lion Trading Private Ltd. v.Rajendra Distributors and Sha Mahendra Kumar Asuram & Sha Asuram Madaji
This case involved a suit filed by Bharat Balar and White Lion Trading Private Ltd. against Rajendra Distributors, alleging infringement of their registered design for Unitary Multilayer Containers and idly plates. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions and damages based on the design's shape and configuration. However, before the court could rule on the merits, the plaintiff voluntarily withdrew the civil suit.
Inkpot Films Private Limited v.Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Inkpot Films Private Limited filed a civil suit seeking permanent injunctions against various telecom and cable companies for infringing the copyright of its cinematographic film, "Is Love Enough? SIR". The plaintiff subsequently withdrew the entire suit and connected applications before the Madras High Court.
Sulphur Mills Limited v.M/s.Dayal Fertilizers Pvt. Limited
Sulphur Mills Limited appealed against an order that revoked its leave to sue M/s.Dayal Fertilizers Pvt. Limited and others regarding alleged patent infringement (Patent No.282429). The core issue before the Madras High Court was whether the suit fell within the court's territorial jurisdiction, given that the defendants operated outside the state. The court ultimately allowed the appeal, holding that the revocation of leave to sue was incorrect due to jurisdictional concerns.
Sulphur Mills Limited v.M/s.Dayal Fertilizers Pvt. Limited
Sulphur Mills Limited appealed against an order that revoked its leave to sue M/s.Dayal Fertilizers Pvt. Limited and others for alleged infringement of Patent No. 282429. The core issue revolved around whether the court had territorial jurisdiction, given that the defendants operated outside the local limits. The Madras High Court allowed the appeals, restoring the suit to the Commercial Division.
M/s. M.S.Milk Product v.The Deputy Registrar of Trademarks Intellectual Property Building, et al.
M/s. M.S. Milk Product filed a Writ Petition seeking an order to expedite the registration process for two trademark applications in Class 29. However, during the hearing before the Madras High Court, the petitioner's counsel informed the court that both trademark applications had already been withdrawn. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition as having become infructuous.
Sanjay Lalwani v.M/s.Jyostar Enterprises
Sanjay Lalwani filed an Original Application seeking an interim injunction against M/s. Jyostar Enterprises and others to prevent the alienation and telecasting of copyright and satellite rights for the film “PSV GARDA VEGA”. The applicant claimed that a subsequent assignment of these rights was in contravention of his original Deed of Assignment. However, the Madras High Court ultimately dismissed the application, holding that disputes concerning copyrights are generally considered non-arbitrable under established Supreme Court precedents.
Tvs Motor Company Limited v.The Controller of Patents
TVS Motor Company Limited appealed the decision of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) which rejected its Patent Application. The appellant argued that the rejection lacked reasoning, failed to consider foreign patent grants for the same invention, and did not properly analyze the prior art cited against the claimed invention. The High Court found the impugned order deficient in reasoning.
Mr.P.Radhakrishnan v.T.V.S.Motor Company Ltd.
The plaintiff filed a civil suit alleging that the defendant was infringing his Patent No.182682, which covered a specific four-stroke internal combustion engine technology used in vehicles like the TVS Flame -125cc. The plaintiff subsequently moved to withdraw the suit due to his severe health conditions.
M/s.Puravankara Projects Limited v.Saurabh Singh
M/s.Puravankara Projects Limited filed a civil suit seeking permanent injunctions against defendants, including Saurabh Singh, Godaddy India, Google India, M/s.Godaddy.com LLC, and Google Inc. The suit alleged trademark infringement (under No.1185286) and copyright infringement related to the name 'PURAVANKARA' and its artistic label, primarily concerning deceptive use of domain names and websites. Although the initial claims sought damages and injunctions, the plaintiff subsequently instructed their authorized signatory to withdraw the suit as the principal claim had been redressed.
Sun Mobility Private Limited v.Mr. Arumugam Rajpendra Babu
The appeal challenged an order that appointed a Scientific Advisor to adjudicate a dispute over patent infringement. The plaintiff claimed his patents covered specific EV battery charging systems, while defendants were accused of infringing with 'quick interchange station' technology. The High Court confirmed the single judge's order appointing the Scientific Advisor and dismissed the appeal.
Coffee Board, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Govt. of India v.Trade Marks Registry
The Coffee Board filed a writ petition seeking an expeditious consideration and registration of specific trademark applications. The Trade Marks Registry responded by confirming that the applications had already been accepted, advertised in the Trade Marks Journal, and would proceed to registration subject to standard legal provisions. Given this confirmation from the Respondent, the High Court found no further order necessary and dismissed the writ petition.
M/s.ADD PRINT [INDIA] ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED v.M/S.LAMBA MARKETING SYSTEMS AND M/S.LAMBA STAMPS AND SIGNS
This civil suit was filed alleging infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademarks ('SUN STAMPER') and designs (Box type pre inked rubber Stamp, Reg. No. 207586) by the defendants using 'STAMP ONE'. The plaintiff sought perpetual injunctions and damages against the alleged infringers. However, despite multiple opportunities to depose its witness over a period of nearly twelve years, the plaintiff failed to appear in court.
M/s.Taranga Technologies v.M/s.Neels Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
The appeal was filed against an order dismissing an application seeking to revoke leave granted in a suit for infringement of registered design and passing off. The core dispute revolved around whether the appellant's involvement in a national tender, which included supply within Chennai jurisdiction, provided sufficient grounds for the court to exercise territorial jurisdiction.
M/s.Diabliss Consumers Products Pvt. Ltd. v.M/s.Dia Health Foods Pvt. Ltd.
Diabliss Consumers Products Pvt. Ltd. filed a civil suit against Dia Health Foods Pvt. Ltd. alleging copyright infringement regarding the artistic design used on its 'Diabliss Diabetic Friendly Sugar' pouches. The plaintiff demonstrated prior creation and use of the unique artistic design since 2015, which was subsequently copied by the defendant for their product, Diabeat. The Madras High Court found that the background, color, and overall get-up of the defendant's pouch were identically similar to the plaintiff's protected design.
Ashok Leyland Limited v.Captain Tractors Private Limited
Ashok Leyland Limited filed a suit alleging that Captain Tractors Private Limited was using the mark 'CAPTAIN' to pass off its goods. The dispute centered on whether the use of the mark constituted passing off, given that Ashok Leyland manufactures heavy vehicles while the respondent holds a registration for mini tractors.
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co.KG v.Tanmed Pharma India Private Limited
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma sued Tanmed Pharma for infringing its patents related to the medicinal product Linagliptin. The court conducted an inspection and found that the defendant had neither manufactured nor marketed the drug, having surrendered its manufacturing license.
Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association v.Dijit Kumar, Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., The Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh State Excise Department
The Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association filed a civil suit against several defendants, including Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., alleging infringement and passing off of their trademarked logos such as “UB”, “SNJ”, “KALS”, “APPOLLO”, and “AM”. The plaintiffs sought damages and permanent injunctions to protect the goodwill associated with these marks. However, before the court could proceed further, the plaintiff chose to withdraw the suit.
S.Sudhakar / Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods P Ltd. v.Priya Krishnakumar / Krishnakumar
This Madras High Court case addresses a complex dispute involving alleged infringement of registered trademarks and copyright in the food product sector. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants were using deceptively similar marks ('UDAYA MASALA' vs 'UDHAIYAM') and infringing on the artistic work/logo associated with their masala powders. While the suit sought various injunctions, damages, and accounts of profits, the judgment provided a preliminary decree addressing these claims.
Deepa Jayakumar v.A.L. Vijay
Deepa Jayakumar filed an appeal seeking an interim injunction to prevent respondents (film producers) from making, releasing, or promoting films/web series about the life of Dr. J. Jayalalitha without her consent, citing concerns over privacy and reputation. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's order.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Sree Annapoorna Foods
Hindustan Unilever Limited appealed an order that allowed Sree Annapoorna Foods to amend its plaint to include a claim for rendition of accounts. The appellant argued that this amendment changed the nature of the suit and was contrary to Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the single judge's finding that the amendment did not fundamentally alter the character of the original infringement and passing off suit.
Relish Snacks Pvt Ltd. v.M/S.Virchow Biotech Pvt.
The Madras High Court dismissed the trade mark infringement suit filed by Relish Snacks Pvt Ltd. against M/S.Virchow Biotech Pvt. The court held that since the plaintiff had not obtained a registered trademark, but only pending applications, the claim for infringement was premature and lacked cause of action. Furthermore, the defendant successfully argued that neither party was the registered proprietor of their respective marks, leading to the suit's dismissal.
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.