Judge Profile

Bench:R.M. Lodha

4 IP cases indexed. Covers patent, design, trademark matters.

Cases Presided Over

4 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1

patent defendant favorable · Jan 14, 2004

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited v.Wyeth Holdings Corporation And Anr.

Bombay High Court · 2005(30)PTC14(BOM)

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited against an interim order favoring Wyeth Holdings Corporation. The core dispute involved alleged infringement and passing off, where Wyeth held the registered trademark 'Pacitane' for anti-spasmodic preparations, and Sun used 'Parkitane'. The court found that due to the identical field of activity, common composition (Trihexylphenidyl), and high likelihood of consumer confusion, the appellants' use was fraudulent. Consequently, the court upheld the protective order granted to Wyeth.

design dismissed · Sep 18, 1998

M/S. Kemp & Company v.M/S. Prima Plastics Ltd.

Bombay High Court · null

The plaintiffs, manufacturers of plastic toys and chairs, filed a suit alleging infringement of their registered design for a Baby chair with a human face and passing off by the defendants. The plaintiffs sought a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing or selling similar products.

trademark defendant favorable · Apr 7, 1997

Arun Digamber Varangaonkar v.M/S. Kharpe Gruh Udyog And 2 Others

Bombay High Court

The plaintiff filed a suit alleging trademark and copyright infringement regarding his spices preparation under the mark 'GHARKUL' against the defendants. The court was asked by the defendants to revoke the ex parte leave granted to the plaintiff. After considering jurisdiction, the court found that the balance of convenience favored trying the case in Amravati, where both parties resided and manufactured goods.

patent defendant favorable · Apr 2, 1997

Arun Digamber Varangaonkar v.M/S. Kharpe Gruth Udyog And Others

Bombay High Court · AIR1997BOM299

The plaintiff filed a suit alleging trademark and copyright infringement against the defendants concerning their masala products. The core dispute revolved around whether the Bombay High Court had proper jurisdiction to hear the case, given that both parties primarily resided and conducted business in Amravati. After considering the facts, including the residence of the plaintiff and manufacturing location of goods, the court determined that the balance of convenience favored a trial in Amravati. Consequently, the ex parte leave previously granted was revoked, allowing the defendants to proceed with their chamber summons.

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 →