Krbl Limited v. Rajesh Kejriwal Trading As Chemical Centre India And Anr.

C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 502/2022

In this ongoing trademark dispute, Krbl Limited sought permission to introduce several documents into the court record. The Delhi High Court allowed the admission of statutory and official records pertaining to the respondent, while rejecting other documents presented by the petitioner due to lack of relevance in the current proceedings. This order allows both parties time to prepare comprehensive written synopses detailing the chronological events and legal arguments for the final adjudication of the cancellation petition.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 502/2022
Decision Date
7 August 2024

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 Krbl Limited vs Rajesh Kejriwal Trading As Chemical Centre India And Anr. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentCS(COMM) 451/2024

Cipla Health LimitedvsAishwarya Healthcare & Ors.

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Cipla Health Limited against Aishwarya Healthcare & Ors. The court found a prima facie case for trademark infringement and passing off, noting that the Defendants' mark 'OMNICEL' is virtually identical to the Plaintiff's established mark 'OMNIGEL'. Furthermore, the court recognized the Plaintiff's copyright claim over the product packaging, leading to a comprehensive restraint order against the use of deceptively similar marks and trade dress.

patentCS(COMM) 852/2025

Caterpillar Inc.vsZhejiang Santian Oil Filter Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Caterpillar Inc. filed a suit against Zhejiang Santian Oil Filter Co. Ltd. alleging infringement of its patented and designed fluid filter systems used in construction and mining machinery. The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction to restrain the Defendants from infringing these rights. Furthermore, the court permitted the appointment of Local Commissioners to inspect premises, seize infringing goods, and take samples for analysis.

patent(T)CMA(PT)10/2023

Rajeev HiremathvsThe Controller of Patents & Designs

Rajeev Hiremath filed an appeal challenging the Controller's refusal to register specific claims (1-12) under Application No. 201741023631. However, on the date of judgment, the appellant withdrew the appeal.

patentCS(COMM) 485/2022

Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors.vsOlvo Lubes International & Ors.

In a significant resolution for Volvo, the Delhi High Court decreed the suit after both parties reached a comprehensive settlement. The defendants formally acknowledged Volvo's exclusive statutory rights and well-known status of the 'VOLVO' trademark in India. As part of the agreement, the defendants committed to paying ₹1,50,000/- to the plaintiffs, effectively concluding the long-running dispute over trademark infringement and passing off.

patentCS(COMM) 357/2023

Relaxo Footwears LimitedvsOm Shiv Footwear Through Its Owner Partner Proprietor Mr. Sushil Bansal

The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Relaxo Footwears Limited against Om Shiv Footwear. The suit alleged infringement of a registered design (Design No. 365606-001) for its 'BAHAMAS' footwear, along with passing off and imitation of the unique trade dress and packaging. The court found that a prima facie case was made out, noting striking similarities in both the product design and the distinctive packaging between the parties. This interim order immediately restrained the defendant from further dealing in the infringing products.

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