M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited v. M/s.Popular Trading Company

C.S.No.432 of 2019

M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited filed a civil suit against M/s.Popular Trading Company alleging trademark infringement, passing-off, and copyright violation concerning their edible oil products. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was using the deceptively similar mark 'Gold Drops' in relation to the plaintiff's registered trade mark 'Gold Winner'. Although the initial suit sought various injunctions and damages, the parties ultimately reached a Joint Compromise Memo.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Madras High Court
Case Number
C.S.No.432 of 2019
Judge(s)
N.Sathish Kumar

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Madras High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited vs M/s.Popular Trading Company is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentCommercial IP Suit (L) No.1657 of 2018 / Notice of Motion (L) No.2932 of 2018

Trans Union Cibil Ltd.vsChetani Manufacturing and Trading Pvt. Ltd.

The Bombay High Court granted an ad-interim order favoring Trans Union Cibil Ltd. against Chetani Manufacturing and Trading Pvt. Ltd. The court found prima facie evidence that the defendant was infringing the 'CIBIL' trademark, misrepresenting itself as connected with CIBIL to the public, and collecting money from victims. Consequently, the injunction prevents the defendant from using or enabling others to use the protected trademarks in relation to credit scores and reports until the final disposal of the suit.

patentFAO-IPD 4/2022

Hamlai Industries Pvt Ltd.vsWD 40 Manufacturing Company

This Delhi High Court order addresses an appeal filed by Hamlai Industries challenging an ex parte injunction granted in a trademark dispute. The court noted the Appellants' claims regarding suppressed correspondence and prior international registrations, arguing that the initial injunction should be suspended. However, before deciding on the merits of the stay application, the court issued directions to both parties, requiring the Appellants to disclose detailed sales and import figures since 2010, and the Plaintiff to provide the complete records from the Trial Court.

patentC.S.No.212 of 2000

Lucas Tvs LimitedvsSurya Carbons

Lucas Tvs Limited filed a suit against Surya Carbons and other entities alleging trademark infringement, passing off, and copyright violation. The plaintiffs sought perpetual injunctions and damages regarding the use of their trademarks (LION, LUCAS TVS) and distinctive packaging on auto electrical parts. However, before the court could rule on the merits, the plaintiffs chose to withdraw the suit.

patentCS(COMM) 79/2022

Dfm Foods LimitedvsITC Limited

The Delhi High Court initiated proceedings in the trademark dispute between Dfm Foods Limited and ITC Limited. While the suit was filed seeking permanent injunction against infringement, passing off, and unfair competition, the court immediately directed both parties toward mandatory mediation. This order sets the stage for amicable resolution while allowing procedural steps like filing additional documents and exemptions from pre-institution mediation.

patentCS(COMM) 501/2021

Novartis AgvsMedipol Pharmaceuticals India Pvt Ltd

The plaintiff, Novartis Ag, filed a suit alleging infringement of its patent (IN 233161) concerning the drug Eltrombopag Olamine. The court found a clear prima facie case in favor of the plaintiff, noting that the rights to the patent had been confirmed previously.

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