Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
405 IP cases indexed. Covers patent, trademark matters.
Cases Presided Over
405 cases indexed | Page 12 of 14
Indian Institute of Technology Madras v.The Controller of Patents and Designs
The Indian Institute of Technology Madras filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging an order passed by The Controller of Patents and Designs regarding the renewal application for its Patent No. 2007637. However, the appellant subsequently instructed counsel to withdraw the appeal.
Oracle International Corporation v.Controller Of Patents
Oracle International Corporation filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the Controller of Patents' order regarding the patentability of its application (3566/CHENP/2006). The appeal argued that the subject matter was eligible for patent protection and not excluded as a business method or computer program per se. However, the appellant subsequently withdrew the appeal.
K.P.D.Rajendran v.Mr.G.Sundarapandian
The Madras High Court dismissed the Original Petitions filed by K.P.D.Rajendran seeking the removal of trademarks 'SOLO' and 'BOVONTO.' The court noted that the impugned trademark registrations (Nos. 929435, 929437, and 929438) had not been renewed by the mark owner. Consequently, the petitions were deemed infructuous.
Trademark Address v.The Registrar of Trademarks
The Madras High Court addressed writ petitions challenging procedural delays in a trademark opposition case. While the petitioner initially sought to overturn an order rejecting an extension for evidence, the court noted that subsequent events had rendered the original petitions infructuous. Since the petitioner subsequently filed a rectification petition against the registered mark, the court disposed of the initial writs but directed the Registrar of Trademarks to expeditiously consider and decide the pending rectification application.
Rasila Jain v.Sh.J.Pradeep
The Madras High Court dismissed the Original Petition filed by Rasila Jain seeking to remove or rectify the trademark entry 'TULASI LABEL' (No. 1783252). The court noted that documentation presented indicated the trademark was valid only until February 10, 2019. Consequently, since the mark had expired, no further adjudication was required, and the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
Cadbury India Limited v.Gomathi Suresh
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by Cadbury India Limited seeking to expunge Trademark No. 1050347 from the register. The court noted that the primary respondent, Gomathi Suresh, submitted that the trademark in question had already expired on October 8, 2021. Consequently, since the mark was no longer active, the petition became infructuous and was dismissed without further adjudication.
M/S.Resq Technologies Private Limited v.Rajdeep Energies Private Limited
The Madras High Court dismissed the Original Petition filed by M/S.Resq Technologies Private Limited against Rajdeep Energies Private Limited and the Registrar of Trademarks. The petition, which sought the removal or rectification of the trade mark 'RESQ' (Device Mark) registered under Trade Mark Registration No. 1779942 in Class 09, was withdrawn by the petitioner. This dismissal followed a settlement reached between the parties involved.
Kiri Industries Limited v.Huntsman Advanced Material (Switzerland) GMBH, The Controller of Patents, The Controller of Patents & Design
Kiri Industries Limited filed an Original Petition seeking revocation of Patent No. 216182, granted to Huntsman Advanced Material for 'AN AZO DYE'. The petitioner subsequently informed the court that it was withdrawing the rectification petition.
Chivas Holdings (Ip) Limited v.Mcdowell And Company Limited
The Madras High Court allowed Chivas Holdings' petition seeking the removal and rectification of a conflicting trademark registration, 'Tribute,' in Class 33. The court noted that Respondent No. 2 (United Spirits Limited) had filed an application for cancellation of this specific mark. Consequently, the court directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to rectify the register by removing Trademark Registration No. 636945 from the records.
T.G.Arumugam v.T.G.Harigopal
The Madras High Court addressed a petition seeking rectification of the trademark 'UMBRELLA BAND' registration. The court noted that the dispute had been resolved through a joint memorandum of compromise, which was subsequently decreed by a lower court. Consequently, the High Court directed the Trademark Registry to allow applications filed under Form TM-P and Form TM-M, thereby officially recording the petitioner as a joint proprietor alongside the respondent. Furthermore, the registry was mandated to implement the agreed geographical division of territory.
Solera Holdings, Inc. v.Solera Networks Inc.
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by Solera Holdings, Inc. seeking the cancellation of Trademark No. 1795016 registered in the name of Solera Networks Inc. The court noted that the trademark registration had already expired on March 13, 2019. Consequently, since the mark was no longer valid, the petition became infructuous and was dismissed without any order regarding costs.
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd v.Natco Pharma Limited
F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd filed a petition seeking the revocation of Patent No. 236791 from the patent register. However, the petitioner subsequently instructed their counsel to withdraw the petition.
N.Mariappan v.S.A.Safiullah and Co.
N.Mariappan filed an appeal seeking revocation of Patent No.198079, arguing that the invention lacked inventive step and was not patentable. The first respondent submitted that the relevant patent had already expired on August 28, 2020.
World Of God Fellowship Inc./d/b/a/Daystar Television Network v.Daystar Television Network India Pvt. Ltd.; Registrar of Trademarks, Trademarks Registry, Chennai
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition seeking the removal and rectification of the trademark 'DAYSTAR TELEVISION NETWORK' from the register. The petitioners argued that the first respondent company had been struck off the Register of Companies and that the impugned trademark ceased to be valid after June 25, 2017. Given these developments, the court found the petition to be infructuous.
Groupe Seb India Private Limited v.Sumit Bafna Trading As: B & J Marketing
Groupe Seb India Private Limited filed a petition seeking the removal or rectification of the trademark 'MAHARAJA WHITELINE' from the register, citing issues related to its validity. However, the Madras High Court ultimately dismissed the petition because the impugned trademark registration number 921351 had already expired on April 28, 2020. This ruling highlights the critical importance of monitoring the expiry dates of intellectual property rights.
M/s.Vicky Industries v.Sh.J.Pradeed; The Registrar of Trade Marks
The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by M/s. Vicky Industries seeking the removal or rectification of the trademark 'TULASI LABEL' (No. 1783253). The court noted that the term of the impugned trademark had expired on February 10, 2019. Consequently, the petition was deemed infructuous, though the petitioner was granted leave to re-apply should the mark be restored.
Hyundai Motor India Limited v.Varna Homes Pvt. Ltd.
In a case concerning trademark disputes, Hyundai Motor India Limited sought the removal and rectification of Varna Homes Pvt. Ltd.'s trademarks from the register. The Madras High Court noted that the parties had reached a comprehensive settlement agreement. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn, directing the Registrar of Trade Marks to implement specific amendments to the service descriptions in both trademarks within four weeks.
Vedant Fashions Private Limited v.Rajul Devi Trading As Manyavar
The Madras High Court addressed petitions filed by Vedant Fashions Private Limited seeking the rectification of registered trademarks held by Rajul Devi Trading As Manyavar. The court noted that the dispute between the parties had been resolved through an out-of-court settlement agreement dated April 1, 2019. Consequently, both petitions were closed without any formal order regarding costs.
Sankalp Rehabilitation Trust v.M/s.Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp.
Sankalp Rehabilitation Trust filed two Original Petitions seeking the revocation and removal of Patents No. 207233 and 234103, both held by M/s. Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp., in the Madras High Court. The petitioner sought to transfer these matters for adjudication regarding patent invalidity. However, the court noted that both patents had already expired on March 24, 2019. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed as infructuous.
Rajeev Hiremath v.The Controller of Patents & Designs
Rajeev Hiremath filed an appeal challenging the Controller's refusal to register specific claims (1-12) under Application No. 201741023631. However, on the date of judgment, the appellant withdrew the appeal.
Haryana Pesticides Manufactures' Association v.Nippon Soda Co. Ltd
The petitioner filed an Original Petition seeking the revocation/cancellation of Indian Patent No. 268448 related to a method of producing granular agrochemical composition. However, the petitioner subsequently informed the court that they intended to withdraw the petition without prejudice to their rights.
Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v.ICOS Corporation of Eli Lilly and Company; The Controller of Patents
Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd filed an Original Petition seeking the revocation of Indian Patent No. 235242 before the Madras High Court. The court noted that the patent had already expired on April 26, 2016.
Monsanto Technology Llc v.Union Of India
Monsanto Technology LLC challenged the rejection of its patent application (No. 6560/CHENP/2008) by the Patent Office. The court found that the impugned order breached principles of natural justice because it referenced sections and paragraphs (like Section 10(4)(a), (b), (c) and paragraph 53) that were neither in the First Examination Report nor in the subsequent hearing notice.
Radhakrishna Adiga v.M/s.Vasudeva Adigas Fast Foods Pvt Ltd
The Madras High Court dismissed a series of petitions filed by Radhakrishna Adiga against M/s. Vasudeva Adigas Fast Foods Pvt Ltd and the Registrar of Trademarks. The original petitions sought the removal or rectification of several trademarks registered under the name 'Vasudeva Adigas Fast Food Pvt Ltd.' However, the court noted that the petitioner had been instructed to withdraw all cases due to a settlement reached between the contesting parties.
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited v.Indian Institute of Science
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited filed a petition seeking the revocation or rectification of Patent No. 229283, alleging it was invalid and obtained by misrepresentation. The court noted that the patent had not been renewed and its term had expired.
Lakshmi Ring Travellers (Coimbatore) Limited v.Bracker Ag
Lakshmi Ring Travellers filed a petition seeking the revocation of Patent No. 212183 held by Bracker Ag. The court noted that the term of the impugned patent had already ended on March 26, 2015.
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited v.Indian Institute of Science
M/s.Abellon Eco Equipments Limited filed a petition seeking revocation of Patent No. 229283, alleging it was invalid and obtained through misrepresentation. The court noted that the document indicated the patent had not been renewed and its term had expired.
Mrs.Veena Kumaravel v.Union Of India
Mrs. Veena Kumaravel challenged the abandonment of her trademark application, 'Natural's @,' before the Madras High Court. The petitioner sought to quash the public notice that treated her mark as abandoned under Section 21(2) of the Trade Marks Act. However, the case was ultimately dismissed because the Central Government subsequently withdrew the order of mass abandonment that formed the basis of the challenge.
Shaik Nazeemuddin v.Mohammed Aslam; Registrar of Trademarks
Shaik Nazeemuddin filed two petitions before the Madras High Court seeking the removal and cancellation of trademarks 'BRIGHT ROCK' and 'BRIGHT' registered by Mohammed Aslam. The petitioner sought to maintain the purity of the trademark register. However, shortly after filing, the petitioner instructed his counsel to withdraw both cases. Consequently, the court dismissed (T)OP(TM)Nos. 288 & 289 of 2023 as withdrawn without making any order regarding costs.
Premier Airways Limited v.Easy Group Ltd
The Madras High Court dismissed the petition filed by Premier Airways Limited seeking the removal of a trademark belonging to Easy Group Ltd. The court noted that the petitioner company had been struck off the Register of Companies, meaning it no longer existed as a juristic entity. Consequently, the court found the petition infructuous and dismissed it without making any order regarding costs.
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.