Zydus Healthcare Ltd v. Shahid Ahmad Mir

Shabbir Medical HallvsMohammed Naseer

Shabbir Medical Hall filed a suit alleging that Mohammed Naseer infringed its registered trademark, 'ISPAHANI TEA,' by using the deceptively similar mark 'FAMILY TEA' along with an imitation color scheme and get up. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions and damages for this alleged infringement. However, the Madras High Court ultimately dismissed the appeals, confirming a single judge's order that revoked the leave granted to the plaintiff. The court held that the plaint failed to establish any part of the cause of action within its local jurisdiction.

Delhi Public School SocietyvsDelhi Public International School

The Delhi Public School Society filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against Delhi Public International School for alleged trademark infringement and passing off, claiming that the use of 'DPIS' was deceptively similar to their established brand 'DPS'. The court initially granted an interim injunction recognizing the plaintiff's prior rights. However, upon considering subsequent developments, particularly the change in name by the defendant school, the court concluded that the main cause of action no longer survived against all parties. Consequently, the suit was disposed of, allowing the plaintiff to pursue remedies regarding pending trademark applications.

Chugai Seiyaku Kabushiki Kaisha & AnrvsNatco Pharma Limited

Chugai Seiyaku Kabushiki Kaisha filed a suit seeking an ad interim injunction against Natco Pharma Limited, alleging infringement of Indian Patent No. IN 294424 concerning Alectinib. The court allowed the application subject to exceptions and noted that while the defendant could use the drug for research under Section 107A, any commercial launch would require prior permission from the court.

Robotics Today B.V.vsRegistrar Of Trade Marks

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal filed by Robotics Today B.V., setting aside the rejection of its trade mark application 'ROBOTICS TODAY' under Section 9(1)(b) and Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The court found that the composite mark was suggestive rather than descriptive when used in the robotics industry, and determined that it was prima facie dissimilar to the cited conflicting mark. Crucially, the judgment mandated a disclaimer, ensuring the registered rights would only cover the combination 'ROBOTICS TODAY' and not the individual words.

Quality Tools SrlvsThe Controller General Of Patents and Designs And Anr.

The case was transferred from the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) to the Calcutta High Court following the enactment of the Tribunals Reform Act, 2021. The court directed its Commercial Appellate Division to issue necessary notices and file a report before listing the matter in March 2023.