Outcome Category

Plaintiff Favorable

at Orissa High Court

4 plaintiff favorable decisions from Orissa High Court.

Plaintiff Favorable Decisions

4 cases | Page 1 of 1

patent plaintiff favorable · Feb 12, 2026

M/s.Green Energy Resources v.Union of India and others

Orissa High Court · W.P.(C) No.19128 of 2024

M/s.Green Energy Resources filed a writ petition seeking the restoration of Patent No.343974, which had lapsed because renewal fees were not deposited by the Petitioner's authorized agent. The court considered arguments regarding agent negligence and the extension of limitation period due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

patent plaintiff favorable · Feb 12, 2026

M/s.Green Energy Resources v.Union of India and others

Orissa High Court · W.P.(C) No.19128 of 2024

M/s.Green Energy Resources filed a writ petition seeking the restoration of Patent No.343974, which had lapsed because the renewal fees were not deposited by the Petitioner's authorized agent. The court considered arguments regarding agent negligence and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the limitation period.

patent plaintiff favorable · Apr 6, 2023

M/S.Mahavir Pvc Cables Factory v.M/S.Indo Mahaveer Kable

Orissa High Court · FAO No.55 of 2023

The Orissa High Court granted a temporary injunction in favor of M/S. Mahavir PVC Cables Factory against M/S. Indo Mahaveer Kable. The court found that the Respondent's use of 'INDO MAHAVEER KABLE' was phonetically and visually deceptive to the Plaintiff’s reputed trade mark, 'MAHAVIR'. Crucially, the court also considered the public interest, noting that the Defendant was using sub-standard materials in their products, thereby protecting consumers from potential harm. This ruling reinforces the importance of preventing market confusion and ensuring consumer safety when dealing with trademark disputes.

trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 18, 2003

Sysmed Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. v.Panbross Pharmaceuticals

Orissa High Court · 96(2003)CLT656

The Orissa High Court upheld a temporary injunction granted against Panbross Pharmaceuticals, finding that their product 'HYCAL FORTE' was deceptively similar to Sysmed Laboratories' established drug 'HICAL'. The court emphasized the high risk of consumer confusion in the pharmaceutical sector, where such errors can have disastrous health consequences. Given the phonetic and visual similarity between the marks, the High Court ruled that a prima facie case for passing off existed, thus dismissing the appeal.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Consult our team →