Gurpal Singh v. Bhim Sain Wadhwa

Green Cross Holdings CorporationvsThe Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India

Green Cross Holdings Corporation appealed the order dated 02.02.2023 by the Controller of Patents and Designs which rejected its patent application for a method of preparing Plasma-derived Hepatitis B Human Immunoglobulin Agent. The appellant argued that all objections were addressed, but the rejection was arbitrary. The High Court found that the respondent failed to discuss the prior arts or provide justifiable reasons for rejecting the inventive step.

Shenzhen Hottech Electronics Co LtdvsThe Registrar Of Trademarks, Trade Marks Registry, New Delhi

The Delhi High Court overturned a trademark refusal order in favor of Shenzhen Hottech Electronics Co Ltd. The appeal was based on the fundamental principle of natural justice, as the appellant claimed they were never properly served with the Show Cause Notice before the Examiner's hearing. Citing established legal precedents, the court held that administrative bodies exercising quasi-judicial functions must afford parties a fair opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the refusal order was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the Registrar of Trademarks for fresh consideration after granting due process.

Goutam Lal TakvsThe Registrar Of Trade Marks

Goutam Lal Tak filed a writ petition seeking intervention from the High Court regarding the prolonged pendency of his trademark registration application for 'MAHALAXMI OIL'. The court acknowledged the delay and issued a specific direction to the Registrar of Trade Marks. This order mandates that the pending application must be decided within six months, providing a clear timeline for the resolution of the matter.

The Chinese University of Hong KongvsThe Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

The Chinese University of Hong Kong appealed an order rejecting its patent application for a method to detect genetic aberrations associated with cancer. The appellant argued that the rejection was based on flawed reasoning regarding Sections 3(i), 3(k), and 10(4)(c) of the Patents Act, 1970. The Madras High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for re-consideration.

Hilton Worldwide Manage LimitedvsM/S Hotel Hilton

In a trademark dispute concerning the 'HILTON' brand, the Delhi High Court issued several orders on July 29, 2025. The court granted the plaintiff an exemption regarding document translation while simultaneously facilitating a resolution through mandatory mediation. Crucially, the defendants stated their willingness to cease using the disputed trademark, leading the court to refer the matter to the Mediation Centre and adjourn further proceedings pending its outcome.