Dunlop International Limited (and Dunlop Slazenger Group Ltd.) v. Glorious Investment Limited And Anr.

Virbac Animal Health India Pvt LtdvsDahyabhai L Patel

Virbac Animal Health India Pvt Ltd appealed a lower court's decision to reject its plaint. The original suit alleged infringement of copyright and passing off of a trademark. The trial judge had rejected the suit based on Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957, citing that the product was manufactured more than fifty times. Virbac argued that this limitation should not apply as their claim also involved trademark passing off, which is excluded from certain definitions in other IP statutes.

A.D.Padmasingh Isaac (Trading as Aachi Spices and Foods)vsV.Senthil Kumar & The Registrar of Trademarks

This Madras High Court judgment addressed a complex dispute involving trade mark infringement and rectification petitions between Aachi Spices and Foods and V.Senthil Kumar. The parties ultimately reached a comprehensive settlement, formalized through a Memorandum of Compromise dated August 31, 2023. Consequently, the court decreed the civil suit by granting a permanent injunction against the defendant's use of similar marks, while simultaneously directing the Registrar of Trademarks to cancel and rectify the disputed registrations held by the respondent.

Hero Investcorp Private Limited & Anr.vsAdvance Ss Auto Parts Pvt Ltd

The Delhi High Court issued a significant interim order in the trademark and copyright infringement suit filed by Hero Investcorp Private Limited against Advance Ss Auto Parts Pvt Ltd. The court granted several procedural reliefs, including exempting the plaintiffs from pre-litigation mediation and advance service, which is crucial given the immediate need for evidence collection. Most notably, the Court appointed a Local Commissioner to conduct search and seizure operations at the defendant's premises to gather evidence of alleged counterfeit 'HERO' branded auto parts, thereby bolstering the plaintiffs' case for injunction and damages.

Pandrol Limited & Anr.vsPatil Rail Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Others

The Delhi High Court granted several interim reliefs in favor of Pandrol Limited, who filed a suit alleging infringement of its copyright and trademark. The court exempted the plaintiffs from pre-litigation mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court allowed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction by appointing a Local Commissioner with broad powers to seize infringing products and gather evidence from the defendants' premises.

Neetha Madala (Proprietor of M/s.Harsha Hospitals)vsThe Registrar of Trade Marks

The Madras High Court allowed Neetha Madala's appeal against the Registrar of Trade Marks, setting aside an earlier refusal to register her device mark 'HARSHA HOSPITALS'. The court found that the Registrar had issued a cryptic, non-speaking order without clearly explaining how the mark infringed Sections 9 or 11 of the Act. Furthermore, the court noted that the appellant had subsequently registered other marks, strengthening her claim for distinctiveness in her specific class (Class 44). Consequently, the application was restored and directed to proceed with the trademark registration process.