M/S P.M. Diesels P. Ltd. v. M/S Thukral Mechanical Works & Ors.

M/S Aman Engineering WorksvsRegistrar, Trade Marks, Trade Marks Registry, New Delhi & Anr.

M/S Aman Engineering Works challenged the Trade Mark Registry's decision to allow review applications filed years after trademark applications were allegedly abandoned due to non-attendance at hearings. The Petitioner argued that the Senior Examiner lacked jurisdiction to condone delays far exceeding statutory limits, citing Supreme Court precedent. The Delhi High Court found a prima facie case in favor of the Petitioner and granted an interim stay on the impugned orders while further legal issues regarding the condonation of over 16 years of delay are examined.

M/S S. S. HospitalityvsM/S Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt. Ltd

This revision petition challenged the territorial jurisdiction of the Delhi Commercial Court regarding a trademark infringement suit filed by M/S Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt. Ltd against M/S S. S. Hospitality. The petitioner argued that since the cause of action arose in Chandigarh, and the respondent had subordinate offices there, the suit should have been filed in Chandigarh. However, the High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the respondent-plaintiff did not possess a subordinate office in Chandigarh, thus validating the original court's decision to allow the suit to proceed in Delhi.

Patanjali Ayurved LtdvsMeta Platforms Inc Ors & Ors.

The Delhi High Court heard an appeal filed by Patanjali Ayurved against a trial court order that had returned its trademark infringement suit, citing lack of jurisdiction. The appellant argued that the suit was not commercial in nature, despite the trial court's finding. The High Court found that the trial court failed to follow mandatory procedural requirements under the CPC when returning the plaint. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the parties were directed to present their case afresh before the Trial Court.

Kubota CorporationvsGodabari Agro Machinery And Services India Private Limited & Ors.

The plaintiff, Kubota Corporation, sued defendants for patent infringement concerning its self-propelled combine harvester (HARVES KING). Defendant No. 3 filed an application seeking return of plaint on grounds of lack of territorial jurisdiction. The court dismissed the application, finding that the plaintiff had established jurisdiction under Section 20(c) of the CPC.

Yang, LipingvsController Of Patents And Designs

Yang, Liping appealed an order dated November 18, 2013, which refused his Indian Patent Application (No. 2769/DELNEP/2004). The refusal was based on the patent not meeting Section 2(1)(j) of the Indian Patent Act, 1970. The court issued directions for service and filing of replies to proceed with the appeal.