Ram Narain Kher v. Ambassador Industries New Delhi And ...

null

The plaintiff sought an ad interim injunction against the defendants for allegedly infringing his patent related to air coolers. The defendants contested the application by challenging the validity of the patent, arguing that it lacked novelty and was not adequately described in the claims. The court ultimately vacated the temporary injunction due to the dispute over the patent's validity.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court
Case Number
null
Decision Date
28 May 1975

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Delhi High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Ram Narain Kher vs Ambassador Industries New Delhi And ... is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentC.S.No.835 of 2007

Metco Polymers Private LimitedvsM/s.AnB Healthcare Products

The plaintiffs filed a civil suit seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants for infringing their registered patent related to 'water beds'. However, the counsel for the plaintiffs subsequently moved an application to withdraw the suit.

patent(T) CMA(PT) No.41 of 2023

Ibrum TechnologiesvsThe Controller of Patents

Ibrum Technologies appealed the dismissal of its patent application for an Intelligent Indoor Air Quality Monitoring System. The rejection was based on non-compliance with various sections of the Patents Act, but the appellant argued that the Controller's proceedings were flawed because their oral submissions were interrupted mid-argument. The Madras High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the Controller.

patent(T)CMA(TM)/62/2023

M.S.Earthevents (I) Private LimitedvsAssistant Registrar of Trade Marks

The Madras High Court set aside an administrative order that had removed a registered trademark (No. 1249884) from the register. The appellant successfully argued that the Registrar of Trade Marks failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements, specifically by not issuing the required notice (Form O-3) to the proprietor before taking action. Consequently, the court allowed the appellant to take necessary steps for the renewal of their trademark.

patentCS(COMM) 395/2023 & I.A. No. 37843/2024

Allied Blenders And Distillers LimitedvsBoutique Spirit Brands Private Limited

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Allied Blenders And Distillers Limited, granting a permanent injunction against Boutique Spirit Brands Private Limited for trademark infringement. The court found that the defendant's mark 'MYRON' was deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s established brand 'KYRON,' particularly as both were used for French Brandy. Furthermore, the court cancelled the defendant's registered trademarks ('BSB MYRON') following rectification petitions, effectively protecting the plaintiff's market exclusivity.

patentRFA(COMM) 129/2025

Jan Aushadhi SanghvsM/S. Pharmaceuticals And Medical Devices Bureau of India (PMBI)

The Delhi High Court addressed an appeal filed by Jan Aushadhi Sangh challenging a lower court's judgment that granted injunction and damages to PMBI for trademark infringement. While the core dispute over the injunction was maintained, the High Court provided relief regarding the financial aspect of the ruling. The appellant was permitted to stay the execution of the Rs. 10 lakh damage award upon depositing Rs. 5 lakhs with the court, though the injunction against further alleged infringement remains in force.

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