Bench:Prathiba M. Singh
448 IP cases indexed. Covers trademark, patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
448 cases indexed | Page 5 of 15
Kalsi Metal Works Pvt. Ltd. v.Registrar Of Trademarks & Anr.
The Delhi High Court addressed several interlocutory applications while continuing the main appeal challenging a trademark registration. The court condoned the appellant's delay in re-filing the appeal and allowed an application for exemption from producing certified copies of documents. Crucially, the court issued notice to the Respondent No. 2 regarding the challenge to their 'KALSI' mark registration, which was previously granted by the Registrar.
Intervet International B.V. v.Veko Care Private Limited
The plaintiff sued the defendant for infringing Indian Patent No. 283279, which covers the active ingredient 'FLURALANER' used in veterinary drugs like 'Bravecto'. The dispute involved the defendant promoting a counterfeit product under the mark 'FURALINE'. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement and filed a joint application.
Merck Sharp And Dohme Corp. v.Sms Pharmaceuticals Limited
Plaintiffs filed a suit seeking an injunction against the manufacture and sale of Sitagliptin products by the Defendant. The parties subsequently resolved their disputes through a settlement agreement dated September 15, 2023, which was recorded by the Court.
BSA Business Software Alliance, Inc. v.Tube Investments Of India Ltd & Anr
The Delhi High Court addressed appeals filed by the BSA Business Software Alliance, Inc. against the rejection of its 'BSA' trademark applications by the Registrar of Trademarks. The dispute involved conflict with Tube Investments of India Ltd., which uses 'BSA' for bicycles and related products. Recognizing the potential for confusion but also the distinct nature of their businesses (software vs. cycles), the Court directed both parties to coordinate and delineate their respective goods and services. This step aims to allow both entities to secure trademark registration without future litigation.
Noumi Ip Pty Ltd. v.Registrar Of Trade Marks
Noumi IP Pty Ltd. appealed the Registrar of Trade Marks' rejection of its trademark application 'MILKLAB,' which was deemed highly descriptive under Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Appellant argued that the mark relates to various milk-based products. Following arguments, the Court did not rule on the merits but instead sought instructions from the Appellant regarding potential remedies, such as amending the application into a logo/device mark or agreeing to a disclaimer concerning the word 'MILK'.
Dr Reddys Laboratories Limited v.Jubilant Generics Limited And Anr
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories filed a suit seeking an injunction against Jubilant Generics for allegedly infringing on its trademark 'RAZO' with the mark 'RAZOEASE'. Following the filing, the Defendant proactively acknowledged an inadvertent mistake and issued assurances to immediately cease all manufacture and sale under the disputed mark. The court accepted these undertakings, leading to the disposal of the injunction application and directing the parties to file consent terms for closure.
Britannia Industries Limited v.Amar Biscuit Private Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an ad interim injunction in favor of Britannia Industries Limited against Amar Biscuit Private Limited. The court found that the Defendants' use of 'GOOD TIME' with a deceptively similar color combination and trade dress to Britannia's established 'GOOD DAY' butter cookies was likely to cause consumer confusion. Given the enormous goodwill associated with the Plaintiff's brand, the court ruled that immediate action was necessary to prevent irreparable harm.
M/S Natures Magic World v.The Registrar Of Trademarks & Anr
M/S Natures Magic World filed a writ petition seeking the Trademark Registry's direction to formally record an Assignment Deed dated February 17, 2016. The petitioner sought to establish ownership of the mark 'COLORESSENCE' (TM No. 1541613) following its assignment from M/s Nature Essence Pvt. Ltd. Despite the existence of the valid assignment deed, the recordal had not been given effect due to administrative confusion stemming from a subsequent name change of the original owner. The Court directed further hearings to resolve these procedural issues and ensure the assignment is duly recorded.
Balajee Wedding And Eventz Pvt. Ltd v.Sudershana Singh
Balajee Wedding And Eventz Pvt. Ltd filed a suit against Sudershana Singh alleging trademark infringement concerning wedding planning services. The Plaintiff holds a registered trademark 'BALAJEE EVENTZ' (No. 4175314) and claims the Defendant is infringing by using similar names like 'BALAJI EVENTS'. The Delhi High Court allowed several procedural applications, including exemption from filing documents and instituting pre-litigation mediation, before formally registering the suit and directing the issuance of summons to the defendant.
Tv Today Network Limited v.Capital Tv And Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Tv Today Network Limited against Capital TV and others. The court found a prima facie case of passing off and trademark infringement, noting that the defendants were imitating the plaintiff's distinctive program names and logos across various digital platforms. Consequently, the defendants were restrained from using deceptively similar marks for news/current affairs programs and ordered to take down all infringing links online.
Cryomass Llc v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs
Cryomass LLC filed an appeal challenging the rejection of its patent application, '201917048279,' titled "Cryogenic Separation of Plant Material." The initial rejection by the Assistant Controller was based on a lack of inventive steps and falling under Section 3(f) of the Patents Act. Cryomass argued that their non-aqueous cryogenic system offered novel advantages not disclosed in prior art. The Delhi High Court, while setting aside procedural objections regarding delay subject to costs, directed further pleadings before listing the case for final hearing.
ITC Limited v.Ashok Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of ITC Limited, restraining defendants from using infringing domain names and sub-domains that fraudulently solicit franchises and dealerships under the guise of ITC's brand. The court reinforced previous orders, directing Domain Name Registrars to immediately lock and suspend the specified domains while also instructing the Cyber Cell to freeze numerous bank accounts linked to these fraudulent activities.
Glaxo Group Limited v.Dermazone Pharmaceuticals Private Limited
Glaxo Group Limited successfully secured an ad-interim injunction against Dermazone Pharmaceuticals in a trademark infringement suit. The Delhi High Court found that the Defendant's mark, 'BECLOVATE,' is phonetically and deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's registered mark, 'BETNOVATE.' Given the identical nature of the products (skin treatments) and strong market presence of Glaxo, the court granted immediate relief to prevent consumer confusion. The injunction restricts the manufacture and sale of the infringing product moving forward.
Cde Asia Limited v.Propel Industries Private Limited
The court heard an application by Cde Asia Limited seeking to place additional documents related to a post-grant opposition concerning a subject patent. The court allowed these documents and also registered a counterclaim filed by Propel Industries Private Limited under Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970.
Cryomass Llc v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs
Cryomass LLC filed an appeal challenging the Assistant Controller's order dated May 31, 2021, which refused Patent Application No. 201917048279 titled "Cryogenic Separation of Plant Material". The refusal was based on non-fulfillment of requirements under Section 2(1)(ja) and claims falling within Section 3(f) of the Patents Act, 1970.
Kent Cables Private Limited & Ors. v.Union Of India Through Its Secretary Department For Promotion Of Industry And Internal Trade & Ors.
Kent Cables Private Limited challenged the inclusion of the trade mark 'KENT' in the list of well-known trademarks, which was advertised by the Registrar of Trade Marks. The Delhi High Court acknowledged that the matter involves complex procedural and substantive issues regarding the declaration of a well-known mark. After reviewing previous directions and legal precedents, the court issued notice to the respondents while keeping open questions of maintainability and jurisdiction, setting the stage for further detailed arguments.
Asociacion De Productores De Pisco A.G. v.Union Of India & Ors
The Delhi High Court addressed several procedural applications and made key interim directions in the case concerning the Geographical Indication (GI) for Chilean Pisco. The court allowed various exemptions related to documentation due to pandemic conditions, while also agreeing to delete one respondent from the array of parties. Crucially, the court directed that the Registrar of Trademarks & GI would not pass final orders on the GI application no. 689 until further notice, providing a temporary stay on the registration process.
Devanand Nagpal Prop. Nagpal Foods And Caterers v.Controller General of Patents Designs and Trade Marks & Ors.
The Delhi High Court addressed a writ petition filed by Devanand Nagpal seeking the issuance of his Trade Mark registration certificate for 'NAGPAL'S SPECIAL CHOLE BHATURE'. Although the opposition against his mark was dismissed in July 2023, the certificate had not been issued. The Court ordered the immediate issuance of the certificate within 10 working days, but crucially stipulated that this registration would remain subject to the final outcome of a parallel appeal filed by the opposing party. This decision balances administrative delay with ongoing legal disputes.
Ht Media Limited & Anr. v.Hindustan News Network & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of Ht Media Limited against Hindustan News Network. The court found that the defendant was attempting to pass off its news channel and name as being connected with the long-established 'HINDUSTAN' mark owned by the plaintiff. Consequently, the defendants were restrained from using the infringing mark and logo, and orders were issued compelling domain registrars (GoDaddy) and tech platforms (Google/Meta) to suspend the infringing website and take down related content.
Fitflop Limited v.Urban Shore Wholesale India Private Limited
The Delhi High Court issued interim directions in a trademark infringement suit filed by Fitflop Limited against Urban Shore Wholesale India Private Limited. While directing the Defendant to immediately cease all use of the 'FITFLOP' mark, the court allowed the continued existence of current stock. A Local Commissioner was appointed to inspect and segregate the existing inventory at the Goa warehouse to determine which products are genuine and which may be unauthorized, paving the way for future valuation and dispute resolution.
Theobroma Foods Private Limited v.Karan Narula And Ors (Theos Food Pvt. Ltd.)
The Delhi High Court finalized a complex trademark dispute between Theobroma Foods and Theos Food Pvt. Ltd., leading to a comprehensive decree based on an amicable settlement. The judgment clarified the usage rights for both 'THEOBROMA' and 'THEOS' in the confectionery market. Key terms include mutual non-opposition, allowing Theobroma nationwide expansion while restricting Theos to the Delhi-NCR region for its mark use.
Major League Baseball Properties Inv. v.Registrar Of Trade Marks, Trade Marks Registry, Delhi
Major League Baseball Properties Inc. appealed the Registrar's decision that their opposition against the 'BLUE-JAY' trademark application was abandoned due to procedural delays in filing evidence. While the initial rejection was based purely on technical grounds, the Delhi High Court allowed MLBP to pursue its substantive claims. The court disposed of the appeal but permitted MLBP to file a cancellation petition, ensuring the merits of their opposition would be considered.
Manu Chaudhary v.Controller Of Patents
Manu Chaudhary appealed against the Controller of Patents' order dated May 31, 2023, which refused his patent application (No. 2545/DEL/2010). The refusal was based on non-fulfillment of various sections of the Patents Act, 1970. The court issued notice and listed the matter for further hearings.
Communication Components Antena Inc. v.Rosenberger Hochfrequenztechnik Gmbh & Co. Kg
The suit is a patent infringement action concerning Patent No. IN240893 ('Asymmetrical Beams for Spectrum Efficiency'). The court proceeded with the recording of cross-examinations of the Defendants' witnesses on September 22, 2023. Evidence has now been concluded, and directions were issued for parties to file written submissions before final arguments.
Kubota Corporation v.Godabari Agro Machinery And Services India Private Limited
Kubota Corporation filed a suit for patent infringement in the Delhi High Court against Godabari Agro Machinery And Services India Private Limited. The dispute centers on Kubota's 'HARVES KING' combined harvester, which the Plaintiff claims is infringed by the Defendants' product, 'Ruilong Plus ++'.
Rana Steels v.Ran India Steels Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court addressed multiple applications filed by Rana Steels concerning the alleged infringement of its registered trademark RANA. The core dispute revolved around the defendant's continued use of similar marks (RANATOR/RAN INDIA) in relation to steel products, despite existing injunction orders. Recognizing the need for factual verification regarding ongoing usage and the disposal of old stock, the Court appointed a Local Commissioner to inspect the premises and examine account books.
Astrazeneca Ab v.USV Private Limited
AstraZeneca filed a suit for infringement against USV Private Limited regarding the pharmaceutical preparations covered by three patents, including those for 'TICAGRELOR'. The parties subsequently resolved their disputes amicably and filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC to record the settlement.
Honasa Consumer Ltd v.Visage Beauty And Health Care Pvt Ltd
Honasa Consumer Ltd filed a petition seeking cancellation of the trademark 'D-TAN' registered by Visage Beauty And Health Care Pvt Ltd. The dispute arose after Honasa received a cease and desist notice from Visage claiming rights over the mark, which overlaps with Honasa's use of 'DETAN' in conjunction with its brand 'AQUALOGICA'. The Delhi High Court allowed procedural applications regarding document filing and issued notice to the Respondent for the stay application, setting future dates for hearing.
Lottoland Holdings Private Limited v.Kuldeep Sharma
Lottoland Holdings Private Limited filed a suit seeking an injunction against Kuldeep Sharma for using the 'LOTTOLAND' trademark and associated device. The Plaintiff, a global leader in online lottery and betting services, alleged that the Defendant's application was a dishonest attempt to appropriate its globally recognized mark. The Delhi High Court granted an interim status quo order, preventing the Defendant from launching any business under the disputed mark until further proceedings.
Raytheon Company v.Controller General Of Patents And Designs
Raytheon Company appealed the refusal of its patent application, 'Scheduling in a High-Performance Computing System,' which was rejected by the Controller under Section 15 for lack of inventive step and non-patentability (Section 3(k)). The core argument centered on the Controller incorrectly applying outdated Computer Related Invention Guidelines. Raytheon contended that their invention provided a technical solution to HPC scalability issues, specifically reducing job scheduling time. The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the refusal order and directing a fresh examination without mandating novel hardware.
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.