Mitsubishi Electric Corporation v. The Controller of Patents and Designs, Government of India

Freebit AsvsExotic Mile Private Limited

Freebit AS filed a suit seeking an injunction against Exotic Mile Private Limited regarding its granted patent, IN 276748, for an 'Improved Earpiece'. The Defendant challenged the validity of this patent by presenting evidence that corresponding foreign patents had been invalidated or refused in several jurisdictions, including based on lack of novelty.

The Applicant (Naga Industries)vsM/S. Lachmi Marain Traders And Others

The Madras High Court dismissed the applicant's requests for an interim injunction against trademark infringement and passing off. The court found that despite the similarity between 'NAGA' and 'AAGA', there was no convincing prima facie case, noting that the respondent had been using their mark openly since 2006 with significant advertising expenditure. Furthermore, the court highlighted the delay in the applicant filing suit (only after receiving a cease and desist notice in 2011) as a critical factor against granting immediate relief.

Paymate (India) Private LimitedvsPaymate Pty Limited; The Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks, The Trade Marks Registry, Chennai

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court disposed of an Original Petition filed by Paymate (India) Private Limited seeking to strike off a specific trademark registration. The court found that Trademark No. 1960699 was no longer in force because its last renewal date had expired on May 5, 2020, and the long stop period for restoration had passed. Consequently, the Court directed the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks to cancel the certificate and remove the entry from the Register.

Nilkamal Crates And Contaners & Anr.vsMs. Reena Rajpal & Anr.

The Delhi High Court addressed a trademark infringement suit concerning plastic molded chairs, balancing claims over both word marks and device marks. While the court found no deceptive similarity between the word marks 'NILKAMAL' and 'NILKRANTI,' it did find that the defendants' adopted logo was deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' registered device mark. Consequently, the injunction sought against the use of the word mark was rejected, but the defendants were strictly restrained from using the infringing device mark.

M/s.A.Habeebur Rahman SonsvsM/s.S.Jaffer Mohideen Alias Noushad

The Madras High Court dismissed an appeal filed by M/s.A.Habeebur Rahman Sons against the rejection of their opposition to a trademark application (No.676174). The court found that despite the appellant's claims of prior use of 'S', the respondent's mark, which prominently features 'FILTER BEEDI,' was not likely to cause confusion among consumers. However, the judgment imposed strict conditions on the respondent, requiring them to use their label in combination with two other specific labels and formally undertake not to use the 'SS' logo independently.