Hotel Panchavati And Anr. v. Hotel Panchavati Pure Veg Family Restaurant and Ors.

177783496

The suit was filed regarding the infringement and passing off of the Plaintiff's registered trade marks, PANCHAVATI / PANCHAVATI GAURAV. The Bombay High Court granted leave to the plaintiffs and decreed the suit, issuing a perpetual injunction against the defendants.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Bombay High Court
Case Number
177783496
Judge(s)
S.J. Kathawalla

Detailed Summary

The suit was filed regarding the infringement and passing off of the Plaintiff's registered trade marks, PANCHAVATI / PANCHAVATI GAURAV. The Bombay High Court granted leave to the plaintiffs and decreed the suit, issuing a perpetual injunction against the defendants.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Bombay High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Hotel Panchavati And Anr. vs Hotel Panchavati Pure Veg Family Restaurant and Ors. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentP51113499

Meher Distilleries Private LimitedvsShree Satpuda Tapi Parisar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.

Meher Distilleries Private Limited filed a suit against Shree Satpuda Tapi Parisar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. alleging infringement of its artistic work and registered trademark related to bottles used for bottling country liquor. The court granted leave, accepted an undertaking from the Defendant, and decreed the suit.

patent76671766

Yonex Kabushiki Kaisha Trading As Yonex Co LtdvsHarshit Setia & Anr.

Yonex filed a petition seeking the rectification and expungement of a trademark registration (No. 5548308) in Class 25, held by Harshit Setia, for the mark 'AERUS'. Yonex argued that the registration was obtained in bad faith and lacked bonafide use, making it ex facie illegal under Section 47(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act. The Delhi High Court accepted notice and directed both parties to file their respective replies within specified timelines, setting the matter for further hearing.

patent8354299

Novartis Ag & AnrvsController General Of Patents, Designs, Trademarks And Geographical Indications & Ors.

Petitioners filed a writ petition seeking directions to expedite the consideration of their Indian Patent Application No. 1014/DELNP/2011, which had been pending for over 15 years despite multiple pre-grant oppositions being filed. The Court noted the unacceptable delay and directed the Respondents to decide the application and all related oppositions as expeditiously as possible within four months.

patent108686314

E. R. Squibb And Sons, LlcvsZydus Lifesciences Limited

E. R. Squibb And Sons, Llc filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against Zydus Lifesciences Limited for infringing Indian Patent No. IN 340060, which covers the monoclonal antibody Nivolumab used in cancer treatment. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant was planning to launch a bio-similar version (ZRC-3276) during the patent's term. The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction, finding that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case and irreparable loss would occur without immediate relief.

patent198010833

Alfa Laval Corporate AbvsClean Earth Energy Solution India Private Limited

The Plaintiff filed a suit alleging patent infringement regarding heat exchanger plates. The Defendants asserted that their product does not infringe the suit patent. To resolve this dispute, the Court ordered the appointment of an independent Scientific Advisor to inspect the impugned product and provide a technical report on potential overlap with the patented claims.

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