Pfizer Inc. v. Everest Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Centrient Pharmaceuticals Netherlands B.V.vsDalas Biotech Limited

The dispute involves a claim of infringement regarding a process patent for manufacturing Amoxicillin Trihydrate. The Plaintiffs sought to implead the Drug Controller General of India, arguing the Defendant failed to prove their process was different from the patented process. The Defendant countered that the Plaintiff was exceeding the scope and had not demonstrated product identity.

M.RameshvsV.Balu

The Madras High Court set aside an order from the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore, which had rejected a trademark infringement suit based on the existence of an arbitration agreement. The court ruled that since the defendants were not parties to the partnership deed containing the arbitration clause, and the dispute concerned trademark rights against third-party entities, the commercial suit was maintainable in civil court. This decision allows the original trademark infringement case to proceed.

Burger King Company LlcvsVirendra Kumar Gupta & Anr.

The Delhi High Court affirmed the strong protection afforded to the 'BURGER KING' trademark, declaring it a well-known mark under the Trade Marks Act. The court relied on Burger King's extensive global presence, long history (since 1954), massive promotional spending, and established secondary meaning in India. This judgment reinforces that globally recognized brands can secure enhanced legal protection against unauthorized use by local operators.

Dabur India LimitedvsWellford Pharmaceutical Private Limited & Anr.

The Delhi High Court granted a stay on the registration of 'WELLFORD PUDIN HARA' (Registration No. 5509160) in favor of Dabur India Limited, who challenged the mark's validity. Dabur successfully established a prima facie case based on its long-standing use and reputation of the core mark 'PUDIN HARA' since 1930. The court found that the Impugned Mark completely subsumes the Petitioner's mark, creating an irrefutable likelihood of confusion and deception in the market.

Mankind Pharma LimitedvsManking Pharmaceutical Private Limited & Anr.

The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Mankind Pharma Limited against Manking Pharmaceutical Private Limited. The court found a prima facie case based on the phonetic similarity between the 'MANKIND' mark and the defendant's adopted variations, as well as the use of a deceptively similar logo device. Furthermore, the plaintiff highlighted suspicious corporate links, suggesting the defendant was incorporated by an ex-employee to dishonestly adopt the protected brand identity.