Judge Profile

Sangita Dhingra Sehgal

4 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

4 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1

patent defendant favorable · Mar 13, 2020

Bharat Bhogilal Patel v.Nokia Corporations & Ors

Delhi High Court · RFA(OS) 10/2020

The appellant filed a Regular First Appeal against a judgment decreeing the suit instituted by the respondent/plaintiff. The original suit declared that the processes and machinery used by the plaintiff did not infringe the appellant's patents (189027 and 188787) and granted permanent injunction restraining the appellant from threatening infringement proceedings. The appeal was dismissed primarily due to the failure of the appellant to prove sufficient cause for condoning the inordinate delay.

patent plaintiff favorable · May 28, 2019

Pentel Kabushiki Kaisha v.M/s Arora Stationers

Delhi High Court · FAO (OS) (COMM) 29/2018

Pentel Kabushiki Kaisha filed suit against M/s Arora Stationers alleging fraudulent imitation of its registered pen design (Design No. 263172). The respondents challenged the validity and novelty of Pentel's design, claiming it was a combination of known designs. However, the High Court ruled in favor of Pentel, emphasizing that since the respondents themselves had applied for registration of a similar design, they could not simultaneously argue against its originality. Consequently, the court found a prima facie case of piracy and granted an interim injunction restraining the respondents from marketing the infringing product.

patent defendant favorable · Mar 27, 2017

M/S Guruji Enterprises Pvt Ltd. v.Union Of India And Anr.

Delhi High Court · LPA 367/2016

The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal filed by M/S Guruji Enterprises Pvt Ltd. challenging the removal of its 'GURUJI' trademark. The core dispute centered on whether a mandatory prior notice (Form O-3) under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, was properly served before the mark's cancellation. The Court upheld the Single Judge's finding that since the notice was sent by post and addressed to the proprietor, it was deemed legally served under Rule 15 of the Rules, thereby validating the removal.

patent mixed · Dec 3, 2015

Vifor (International) Limited v.The High Court Of Delhi

Delhi High Court · W.P.(C) 11035/2015 & W.P.(C) 11043/2015

This writ petition challenged the mandatory transfer of commercial disputes related to five key statutes—Patents, Trademarks, Designs, Copyright, and Geographical Indications—to the Commercial Division of the High Court. The petitioners argued that suits under these specific IP Acts should remain in their original forum, even if the value is below Rs. 1 crore. The court provided an interim order, holding that these cases shall not be transferred, while also directing Single Judges to consider amendment applications as per law.

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 →