Short Summary
The Madras High Court dismissed three Transfer Original Petitions filed by Kishorkumar Gokaldas against the Registrar of Trademarks. The petitions sought to remove or rectify specific trademark registrations (Nos. 2224503, 2224504, and 2224505). However, both parties agreed that these trademarks had not been renewed and were therefore no longer in force, rendering the legal challenges moot and infructuous.
Detailed Summary
of the Paris Local Division of the Unified Patent Court concerning a request for extension of time filed by the Bosch defendants. The judge-rapporteur rejected Bosch's request, finding that a non-redacted version of Valeo's 15 June 2026 filing had been deposited in the CMS simultaneously with the redacted version, and that Bosch had failed to exercise due diligence in accessing it. The court ruled that the deadlines under R.29(d) RdP run from 15 June 2026.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Madras High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Kishorkumar Gokaldas vs The Registrar of Trademarks is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co LtdvsController Of Patents And Designs And Ors.
Takeda Pharmaceutical appealed a rejection order by the Deputy Controller of Patents & Designs regarding its patent application for Novel Protein Kinase Inhibitors (Brigatinib). The rejection was based on lack of inventive steps and Section 3(d) objections. The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the respondent failed to consider crucial supplementary data demonstrating Brigatinib's superior selectivity and therapeutic efficacy.
Valary Lab Private LtdvsG1 Therapeutics Inc & Anr.
The petitioner, Valary Lab Private Ltd, filed a petition seeking the revocation of Patent No. 434029 and an injunction against threats related to its alleged infringement. The court allowed applications for additional documents and granted notice to all parties. The case is set for re-notification on November 12, 2025.
University Health NetworkvsAdiuvo Diagnostics Private Limited
University Health Network filed a Writ Petition challenging the grant of Patent No.439474 to Adiuvo Diagnostics Private Limited, arguing lack of novelty and inventive step. The appeal before the Madras High Court focused on whether the court had territorial jurisdiction to hear the matter, given that the patent application originated in Delhi.
V.Periasamy, Finetech Pipe ProductsvsV.Shanmugham, S.Sudha; The Deputy Registrar of Trademarks
The Madras High Court dismissed an Original Petition filed by V.Periasamy against V.Shanmugham and the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks. The petitioner sought to cancel a registered trademark (No. 1005460) in Class 17, alleging it was obtained unlawfully. However, due to repeated failure to appear before the court despite proper notice, the petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
Rxprism Health Systems Private LimitedvsCanva Pty Ltd & Ors
The Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants' product infringes their patent titled 'A system and a method for creating and sharing interactive content rapidly anywhere and anytime'. The Defendants were previously restrained from making the product available in the market.
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.
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.