Bench:Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
237 IP cases indexed. Covers patent, trademark matters.
Cases Presided Over
237 cases indexed | Page 4 of 8
Mankind Pharma Limited v.De Harbien Life Sciences Private Limited
The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Mankind Pharma Limited against De Harbien Life Sciences Private Limited. The court found that the defendant's use of marks like 'NEFROKIND' and 'SILOKIND' was likely to cause confusion with Mankind's well-known trademarks, including 'MANKIND' and its formative variants. Given the pharmaceutical nature of the products and the potential for irreparable harm to the plaintiff and the public, the court restrained the defendant from selling or advertising the impugned marks until further hearing.
Capital Foods Private Limited v.Krs Multipro Private Limited & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Capital Foods Private Limited against Krs Multipro Private Limited. The suit involves allegations of trademark and copyright infringement concerning the popular brand 'SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY'. Based on a prima facie case, the court found that the Defendants' product packaging copied the Plaintiff's registered mark precisely, posing a risk of market confusion. Consequently, the Defendants were immediately restrained from using the infringing mark until the final hearing.
Sunil Jain v.Registrar Of Trademarks & Anr
This Delhi High Court order addresses an appeal filed by Sunil Jain against the Registrar of Trademarks and others. The court noted that pleadings were complete but directed the respondent no. 2 to file their reply within one week, condoning the delay. The matter has been scheduled for listing on December 17, 2025, indicating ongoing litigation rather than a final decision.
Rajat Sharma & Anr. v.Tamara Doc & Ors.
The Delhi High Court issued an interim order in a suit concerning alleged infringement of personality and publicity rights, registered trademarks, and copyright. The court directed the plaintiff to serve advanced copies of their pending applications on the counsel representing proposed defendant no. 17 (Google LLC). This procedural step moves the litigation forward as the court prepares for further hearings regarding the injunction and impleadment requests.
M/S Landmark Crafts Private Limited v.Romil Gupta Proprietor Of M/S Sohan Lal Gupta & Anr.
The Delhi High Court addressed an appeal challenging the rejection of a defendant's application to take certain affidavits on record in a trademark infringement suit. The court ultimately allowed the application, accepting the additional documents despite procedural delays. This decision emphasizes judicial flexibility and the importance of considering the context of litigation history when determining admissibility of evidence.
Guangzhou Hodm Professionals Cosmetics Co Ltd v.Registrar Of Trademarks & Anr.
The Delhi High Court issued directions in the trademark dispute concerning an allegedly forged assignment deed. Given that Respondent No. 2 filed an assignment deed which is being challenged, the court mandated that Respondent No. 1 (the Registrar) must file a detailed response within four weeks. Furthermore, the Registrar must specify the safeguards taken by the Trade Marks Registry when processing such assignments, highlighting concerns over potential fraud.
Rajan Adlakha v.Registrar of Trademarks & Anr.
Rajan Adlakha filed a writ petition seeking direction against the Registrar of Trademarks regarding a pending opposition. The petitioner argued that since the opponent failed to file evidence by the statutory deadline, the opposition was deemed abandoned under Trademark Rules, but the Registrar had not formally recorded this status. The Delhi High Court directed the Respondent No. 1 (Registrar) to treat the petition as a formal representation and pass appropriate orders recording the abandonment within four weeks.
Zepto Private Limited & Anr. v.Owner Of Domain Name Zeptonowindia.Com & Ors.
In this trademark infringement suit, Zepto Private Limited sought an interim injunction against domain name holders. The court proceeded with the initial stages of litigation, granting several procedural reliefs to the plaintiffs, including exemption from pre-litigation mediation due to the urgency of the matter. While the core dispute over trademark rights and domain squatting remains pending, the court has set out a detailed schedule for service of summons and filing pleadings.
Tata Sons Private Limited v.Martuj Ali & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of Tata Sons Private Limited against Martuj Ali & Anr. The court found a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off, noting the well-known status and extensive use of the 'TATA' mark by the Plaintiff. Consequently, the Defendants were restrained from using the impugned mark 'TATA BIRI' or any deceptively similar variations, preventing consumer confusion regarding their association with the Tata Group.
Synertec Pty Ltd v.Union Of India & Anr.
Synertec Pty Ltd filed a writ petition seeking restoration of its patent application (No. 202217030233) which had been deemed withdrawn under Section 11B(4) of the Patents Act, 1970. The Petitioner argued that the failure to file the request for examination was due to an inadvertent error by its Patent Agent regarding the deadline. The Court allowed the petition, finding that the Petitioner acted diligently and should not suffer consequences of the agent's mistake.
Hero Investcorp Pvt Ltd And Anr v.Ashok Kumar (John Doe)
The Delhi High Court granted interim relief to Hero Investcorp Pvt Ltd in its suit against an unidentified entity manufacturing and selling counterfeit two-wheeler spare parts. The court recognized the Plaintiffs' registered trademarks and trade dress associated with 'HERO GENUINE PRODUCTS.' Crucially, the court appointed a Local Commissioner to execute a search and seizure commission at the Defendant's premises to recover infringing goods, setting the stage for further litigation.
XX v.Y
The Delhi High Court granted several critical reliefs to the Plaintiffs in their trademark infringement suit against Y. The court allowed the plaintiffs to proceed without mandatory pre-institution mediation, masked the parties' identities during initial proceedings, and permitted an ex parte interim injunction supported by a Local Commissioner's commission. This decision allows the plaintiffs, who own the 'HERO' brand, to swiftly investigate and address the alleged sale of counterfeit two-wheeler spare parts.
Jaquar And Company Private Limited v.Jaquar Franchise & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted interim injunctive relief in favor of Jaquar And Company Private Limited against various defendants regarding the unauthorized use of its 'JAQUAR' trademark. The court ordered immediate suspension of specific domain names associated with the mark and directed actions to freeze relevant bank accounts, recognizing the brand's well-known status. This order sets a strong precedent for protecting established trademarks in the digital age.
Capital Foods Private Limited v.Damyaa (Pj) Foods Private Limited
The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Capital Foods Private Limited against Damyaa (Pj) Foods Private Limited. The court found that the Defendant's use of 'SCHEZWAN TUFANI CHUTNEY' was a clear case of dishonest imitation and deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's registered trademark, 'SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY'. Given the Plaintiff's established reputation and significant market presence, the injunction aims to prevent consumer confusion and irreparable harm.
Manash Lifestyle Private Limited v.Anupam Srivastava & Anr.
Manash Lifestyle Private Limited filed a petition seeking rectification of a trademark registration under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The petitioner challenged the registration of the mark 'VNYABAIE' in Class 3, which was registered in the name of Anupam Srivastava. The Delhi High Court issued notices to all parties and directed that the matter be listed before the Joint Registrar for completion of service and pleadings, setting a future date for hearing.
M/S Bhagwati Enterprises v.Rajesh Kumar Aggrawal
In this Delhi High Court order, the court addressed several procedural applications in a suit concerning trademark infringement and passing off. The court granted the plaintiff exemptions for filing copies and instituting pre-litigation mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court allowed the plaintiff time to amend the plaint after finding that the initial claims regarding manufacturing capacity were unsubstantiated by the records.
Herbalife International Inc. v.Shiv Shakti Enterprises & Ors.
The Delhi High Court extended the existing interim injunction against Herbalife's trademarks to a newly impleaded defendant (Mr. Narayan Lal Kumawat) after relying on a local commissioner's report indicating counterfeit activity. The court also issued strict directives, requiring all involved parties to discontinue selling infringing goods on Flipkart and disclose detailed transaction information related to the alleged trademark infringement.
Woodland (Aero Club) Pvt. Ltd. v.M/S Speedways Tyre Treads & Anr.
The Delhi High Court issued several orders in favor of the Plaintiff, Woodland (Aero Club) Pvt. Ltd., in its suit against M/S Speedways Tyre Treads & Anr. The court granted exemptions for pre-institution mediation and advanced service, recognizing the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court allowed the Plaintiff to seek an ex-parte ad-interim injunction by appointing a Local Commissioner to inspect the premises and stock of the Defendant, thereby initiating immediate protective measures against alleged trademark infringement.
Triveni Household Items Manufacturers Private Limited v.Radhey Radhey Industries & Anr.
In this trademark dispute, the defendants sought to vacate an existing injunction. The plaintiff argued that a pending rectification petition was irrelevant to the current litigation. The court directed the plaintiff to submit the entire record of the rectification petition within two weeks, ensuring both parties have access to all relevant information as the case proceeds.
Impresario Entertainment And Hospitality Pvt Ltd v.M/S. Social Kitchen Through Its Proprietor
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction in favor of Impresario Entertainment, who holds a registered trademark for 'SOCIAL' used across various hospitality services. The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience lay in their favor, noting the defendant's prior withdrawal of its own application due to concerns over deceptive similarity. This interim order immediately restrains the defendant from using marks similar to 'SOCIAL', including variations like 'SOCIAL KITCHEN'.
Jsw Mg Motor India Private Limited v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks & Anr.
The Delhi High Court heard an appeal filed by JSW MG Motor India Private Limited challenging the Registrar of Trade Marks' order that treated their application as abandoned due to non-appearance. The Appellant argued that their newly engaged counsel made reasonable attempts to join the virtual hearing but was unable to do so because the VC link was sent to the previous counsel. The Court prima facie agreed with the Appellant, finding that the inability to attend was not attributable to the new counsel. Consequently, notice was issued to the Respondents, and the matter was listed for further consideration.
Tata Sons Private Limited & Anr. v.Sohel Iliyasbhai Dantroliya
The Delhi High Court addressed several procedural applications in the trademark infringement suit filed by Tata Sons against Sohel Iliyasbhai Dantroliya. Crucially, the court granted an interim injunction and permitted the appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect and seize infringing goods (VITA GLUCO+) bearing deceptively similar packaging to TATA GLUCO+. The order also provided procedural relief to the plaintiffs regarding extensions of time, exemption from pre-institution mediation, and permission to file additional documents.
Sg Corporate Mobility Pvt .Ltd. v.Marvel Technoplast Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court addressed several procedural applications in the trademark opposition matter between Sg Corporate Mobility and Marvel Technoplast. The court granted an exemption request regarding the submission of a certified copy of an NCLT order, allowing the petitioner four weeks to comply. Furthermore, recognizing that Respondent No. 1 had filed notice of opposition to Petitioner's trademark application no. 6792577 but failed to appear, the Court directed formal service and issuance of notices to ensure due process continues in the matter.
Usms Saffron Co. Inc. v.Rupesh Rathore Trading As Rm International
The Delhi High Court issued a comprehensive order in the trademark, copyright, and passing off infringement suit filed by Usms Saffron Co. Inc. against Rupesh Rathore Trading As Rm International. The Court granted an ad-interim injunction to protect the Plaintiff's registered trademarks and unique packaging/trade dress for 'BABY BRAND SAFFRON'. Furthermore, the court set out procedural directions regarding document submission, exempted the plaintiff from pre-institution mediation due to the urgency of interim relief, and fixed the fee for a Local Commissioner to inspect the premises.
Capital Foods Private Limited v.Pitambari Products Private Limited
In a dispute over trademark infringement, Capital Foods Private Limited and Pitambari Products Private Limited reached an out-of-court settlement. The Delhi High Court formalized this compromise, decreeing the suit in favor of the Plaintiff while allowing the Defendant limited usage rights for specific packaging (PITAMBARI RUCHIYANA SCHEZWAN HOT & SPICY). This resolution allows the parties to move forward without protracted litigation over damages and accounts.
Pathkind Diagnostics Private Limited v.Registrar Of Trade Marks
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal filed by Pathkind Diagnostics Private Limited against the Registrar of Trade Marks' rejection of its trademark application for 'PATHKIND LABS'. The core issue was the existence of cited marks owned by the petitioner's director. By presenting an Assignment Deed and a No Objection Certificate (NOC), the court found that the ground for rejection had been sufficiently addressed. Consequently, the application was directed to be accepted and advertised in the Trademark Journal.
Harpal Singh Gulati v.Registrar Of Trademarks
This Delhi High Court order addresses an appeal filed by Harpal Singh Gulati challenging the rejection of his trademark application for 'Martban -MAA KE HAATH SA'. The core dispute revolves around the appellant's claim of prior use. Crucially, M/s Martbaan, proprietor of similar marks, was impleaded as a respondent to participate in the proceedings. The Court set out a detailed schedule for filing pleadings and listing the matter before the Joint Registrar.
Krbl Limited v.Shailendra Chaturvedi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court disposed of the appeal in Krbl Limited vs Shailendra Chaturvedi & Anr., resolving a dispute over the scope of the trademark 'DOON MEMORIES'. The court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to amend the registration (TM No. 421683) to restrict the goods exclusively to bakery products, based on an undertaking given by Respondent No. 1. This decision effectively narrowed the scope of the mark's use, provided the respondent adheres strictly to the agreed-upon limitations.
Lifestyle Equities C.V. v.Dilipkumar Narandas Sheth Trading As M/s. Arihant Enterprise
In this ongoing trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court addressed several interlocutory applications. The court allowed the defendant to file vernacular and dim documents while simultaneously directing both parties to engage in an amicable resolution. Crucially, the court acknowledged evidence presented by the defendant regarding the historical use of a specific logo as a watermark on invoices dating back to 1993, allowing the plaintiff to inspect these original documents. The judgment emphasizes the possibility of settlement before further litigation proceeds.
Pureplay Skin Sciences (India) Pvt. Ltd. v.Mr. Wazahat Choudhary
In a trademark infringement suit concerning skincare products, the Delhi High Court issued several procedural orders favoring the Plaintiff, Pureplay Skin Sciences. The court granted leave to file additional documents and exempted the plaintiff from mandatory pre-litigation mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court also allowed the appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the defendant's premises for potential counterfeit goods, while simultaneously granting exemptions regarding advance service and discovery procedures.
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.