Hindustan Syringes And Medical Device and Ltd. v. Unomedical A/S and Anr.

C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 148/2021 & C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 246/2024

The Delhi High Court allowed an appeal filed by Hindustan Syringes against a previous decision by the Registrar of Trademarks. The court set aside the impugned order, which had previously dismissed the opposition filed by Hindustan Syringes regarding the mark 'UNOMEDICAL'. Furthermore, based on the parties' consent, the court also allowed a rectification petition, leading to the cancellation of UNOMEDICAL's trademark registration in Class 10. This decision significantly impacts the validity and scope of the contested brand.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 148/2021 & C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 246/2024
Decision Date
5 March 2025

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Delhi High Court - Orders. Understanding the court's reasoning in Hindustan Syringes And Medical Device and Ltd. vs Unomedical A/S and Anr. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patent28-COMAPL-21303-2022

Paras Ayurvedic Pharma Pvt LtdvsSalman Iqbal Ahmed Momin And Anr

This commercial appeal involved a dispute over the use of an artistic design on a medicinal oil, 'Roghan Sukoon Massage Oil.' The plaintiff claimed copyright infringement and passing off against the defendant. The core issue revolved around whether the defendant's similar artwork constituted blatant copying and if the plaintiffs had sufficient knowledge to pursue legal action promptly. The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's decision that the defendant did not infringe upon the plaintiffs' rights.

patentCOMAP No.401 of 2024

M/S Kaveri Plasto Containers Pvt LtdvsM/S Kaveri Polymers

The Karnataka High Court allowed an appeal filed by M/S Kaveri Plasto Containers Pvt Ltd, setting aside a lower court's decision that had barred them from filing a trademark infringement suit without first undergoing pre-institution mediation. The High Court held that because the appellant sought urgent interim reliefs, such as temporary injunction and appointment of a court commissioner, the mandatory requirement of pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act did not apply. Consequently, the original suit and all related applications were restored for trial.

patent2023:BHC-OS:4948

Henkel Ag And Co. KgaavsThe Registrar of Trademarks

The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of Henkel Ag And Co. Kgaa, setting aside an earlier refusal by the Registrar of Trademarks to register a subject mark. The court found that the Senior Examiner failed to properly consider crucial material on record, including evidence of opposition and abandonment status of cited marks, as well as a NoC obtained by the petitioner. Consequently, the matter was remanded back for the Respondent to conduct a fresh hearing based on all submitted facts.

patentCS(COMM) 159/2024

F- Hoffmann -La Roche AgvsZydus Lifesciences Limited

F- Hoffmann -La Roche filed a suit for infringement against Zydus Lifesciences Limited concerning two patents related to Pertuzumab, a monoclonal antibody used in cancer treatment. The court issued several procedural orders and directed both parties to provide exhaustive legal and scientific assistance, including disclosing experts and considering an independent Scientific Advisor, while the core issue of formulation identity remains pending.

patentC.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 113/2022

ITC Limited Of Virginia HousevsThe Deputy Registrar Of Trademarks And Ors.

The Delhi High Court overturned a previous Registrar's decision that had treated ITC's opposition to the mark 'LUCKY NINE' as abandoned due to delayed filing of evidence. The court held that since ITC had clearly stated its willingness to rely on the grounds of opposition within the prescribed period, the abandonment was unjustified. Following this ruling and citing precedent, the High Court ultimately cancelled the registration of 'LUCKY NINE', restoring ITC's rights.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call