S. Sudhakar and Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. Sree Sai Raama Oil Mill, V. Dhadapani, and S. Ravichandran

Mahindra & Mahindra LimitedvsMNM Marketing Pvt. Ltd.

The Bombay High Court granted temporary relief in favor of Mahindra & Mahindra Limited against MNM Marketing Pvt. Ltd., finding that the abbreviation 'M & M' enjoys protection as a registered trademark. The court issued a comprehensive injunction preventing the defendants from using the impugned marks, similar domain names (like www.mandmstores.in), or passing off their goods and services as those of the plaintiffs. Furthermore, Defendant No. 1 was mandated to delete 'MNM' from its corporate name within four weeks.

Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd.vsKothari Products Ltd. & Anr.

The Delhi High Court allowed a cancellation petition concerning the trademark 'GOLDIE'. The court accepted an affidavit of undertaking from Respondent No. 1, which stated that they had never used the impugned mark in trade and that the claimed user date was incorrect. Consequently, the court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to cancel/expunge Registration No. 490303 within six weeks.

Allied Blenders And Distillers Private LimitedvsPrakash Distillery And Chemical Co Private Limited

The Delhi High Court addressed a challenge to the court's territorial jurisdiction raised by the defendant in a trademark dispute. While acknowledging that the cause of action is not strictly necessary under Section 134 of the Trademarks Act, 1999, the Court required both parties to clarify their business presence across various locations (Delhi, Kolkata, Siliguri). The court directed the filing of specific affidavits detailing office locations and sales activities before reserving judgment on interim relief.

Hakimuddin BhematvsMahaveer Prasad Agarwal And Anr.

The Calcutta High Court granted an interim injunction protecting the petitioner's intellectual property rights related to fertiliser sprayers. The court found that the respondents were using a virtually identical packaging and trade dress, including the word 'Bharat Shakti,' which amounted to deceiving the public. Consequently, the respondents were restrained from making such imitations, and a Receiver was appointed to inventory the infringing products.

Resilient Innovations Private LimitedvsPhonepe Private Limited

Resilient Innovations Private Limited challenged an order passed by the lower court that allowed Phonepe Private Limited to withdraw its trademark infringement suit with liberty to file a fresh one. The Appellant argued this grant constituted a jurisdictional error and should be appealable. However, the Bombay High Court ultimately dismissed the appeal on the grounds of maintainability, holding that the Impugned Order was not a 'decree' under the CPC. While avoiding comment on the merits of the IP dispute, the court provided clarity on the legal effect of such withdrawal orders.