Bench:S.P.Garg
5 IP cases indexed. Covers trademark, design, patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
5 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1
M/S.J.K.Oil Industries v.M/S. Adani Wilmar Limited
The Delhi High Court addressed an application seeking to stay a composite suit involving both trademark infringement and passing off, contingent on a pending trade mark rectification application. The court ruled that while Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act applies specifically to infringement suits, allowing the stay there, it does not apply to claims of 'passing off.' Consequently, the suit for infringement was stayed until the final decision of the rectification petition, but the parallel suit for passing off must continue and be decided on its own merits.
M/S Kamdhenu Limited v.M/S Aashiana Rolling Mills Ltd
M/S Kamdhenu Limited filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against M/S Aashiana Rolling Mills Ltd for infringing its registered design related to TMT steel bars. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant copied the unique double-rib surface pattern of their patented bar, which was protected under Design Act, 2000 (No. 250968). The defendant countered by arguing that the design was based on a public domain British Standard and lacked novelty. The Delhi High Court granted interim protection to Kamdhenu Limited, finding a prima facie case for infringement.
Saregama India Limited v.Eros Digital Fz Llc
Saregama India Limited filed an application seeking an ad-interim injunction against Eros Digital Fz Llc, alleging copyright infringement and default payments following the expiry of a content license agreement. The core legal battle revolved around whether the Delhi High Court possessed territorial jurisdiction to hear the matter. The court examined Clause 29 of the License Agreement, which explicitly mandated that disputes arising from the contract must be heard exclusively by the High Court of Calcutta.
Times Internet Ltd. v.Time Broadband Services Pvt.Ltd.
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Times Internet Ltd., finding that the defendant's use of 'timebroadbandindia.com' constituted trademark infringement and passing off against the plaintiff's established brand, 'indiatimes'. The court emphasized the priority of adoption and the extensive reputation built by the plaintiff over its digital assets. Consequently, a permanent injunction was granted, along with punitive damages.
Sushma Berlia & Ors. v.Kamal Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, who owned the registered trademark 'APEEJAY' used by an educational society. The suit was filed against a parents' association that had adopted the same name. The court held that even though the defendants were non-trading and non-profit, their use of the mark created a likelihood of public confusion, suggesting patronage or affiliation with the plaintiffs' school. Consequently, the court granted a permanent injunction preventing the unauthorized use of 'APEEJAY' by the association.
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.