Bench:M.Venugopal
7 IP cases indexed. Covers patent, trademark, copyright matters.
Cases Presided Over
7 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1
New Hope Industries Pvt. Ltd. v.Pioneer Bakeries (P.) Ltd.
New Hope Industries challenged the Intellectual Property Appellate Board's decision to rectify its trademarks, Milka Wonder Cake. However, before the Madras High Court could rule on the validity of the marks, both parties entered into a Dispute Settlement Agreement (MOU) dated March 26, 2018. Consequently, the court dismissed the Writ Petitions as withdrawn, resolving the dispute outside of judicial decree.
Muthukani Diravidakani & Rakkappan Muthukani (Trading as M/s Anil Appalam & Chips) v.K.S.Raja, The Registrar of Trade Marks, and The Registrar, Intellectual Property Appellate Board
The Madras High Court allowed the petitioners, who trade as M/s Anil Appalam & Chips, to file a Review Petition against an adverse order passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) in 2013. The court granted this permission and further directed the IPAB not to strictly enforce the limitation period if the review petition was filed within two weeks of the High Court's order. This procedural relief allows the petitioners to challenge the original decision regarding their trade mark registration.
Suru International Pvt. Ltd v.B.Braun Melsungen AG
Suru International Pvt. Ltd filed a Writ Petition challenging an order passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). The petitioner sought revocation of Patent No. 210062. The Madras High Court set aside the IPAB's order to the extent that it had remanded the matter back to the Controller General of Patents & Designs, directing the IPAB to decide the issue de novo.
K.Manivannan v.The Chairman Intellectual Property Appellate Board, The Controller of Patent & Designs, M.Mani
The petitioner challenged the validity of Patent No. 204322, granted to M.Mani (the third respondent), arguing that the invention was already publicly available or anticipated by his own earlier work. The petitioner sought revocation of the patent before the High Court.
Bhushan Goyal (Proprietor, Chanda Softy Ice Creams) v.Intellectual Property Appellate Board & Mars Incorporated
The Madras High Court dismissed a Writ Petition filed by Bhushan Goyal against the Intellectual Property Appellate Board and Mars Incorporated. The petitioner had sought to quash an order related to the renewal of a trademark registration granted to Mars Incorporated. However, before any substantive ruling on the merits, the petitioner voluntarily moved to withdraw the petition, leading to its dismissal.
K.R. Ravi Rathinam v.The Director General Of Police and others
The petitioner, K.R. Ravi Rathinam, filed a Writ Petition seeking a detailed inquiry by police authorities into the alleged theft and unauthorized use of his story ('Mullai Vanam 999') in another film ('Linga'). The court dismissed the petition, holding that the dispute was private and that the appropriate remedy for intellectual property claims is through a Civil Suit or Criminal Law proceedings, not under Article 226.
Mr.Muthukumar; Mrs.Padmavathi; M/s.Alama International v.M/s.Aloha India (A Division of K.K.Academy (P) Ltd); Mrs.J.V.Vasantha Laxmi
The petitioners challenged an order passed by the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, which had granted an ad-interim injunction favoring the first respondent. The respondents argued that since the suit involved matters relating to Trade Marks Act, 1999, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the trial court and constituted an abuse of process. The High Court agreed, holding that the relief sought under the Trade Marks Act must be initiated in the High Court itself.
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.