Symphony Limited v. Roman Marketing & 12

C/CA/11889/2014

The Gujarat High Court granted interim relief in favor of Symphony Limited concerning the manufacture and sale of aircoolers. The court considered an agreement involving the custody of a cooler mould and referenced a prior restraint order from the Mumbai High Court against one of the respondents for trademark infringement and passing off related to the design. This decision provides immediate protection to the plaintiff while the appeal proceeds.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Gujarat High Court
Case Number
C/CA/11889/2014
Judge(s)
A.J.Desai

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Gujarat High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Symphony Limited vs Roman Marketing & 12 is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentosa 117 of 2020

Sun Mobility Private LimitedvsMr. Arumugam Rajpendra Babu

The appeal challenged an order that appointed a Scientific Advisor to adjudicate a dispute over patent infringement. The plaintiff claimed his patents covered specific EV battery charging systems, while defendants were accused of infringing with 'quick interchange station' technology. The High Court confirmed the single judge's order appointing the Scientific Advisor and dismissed the appeal.

patentO.S.A. Nos. 300 to 303 of 2011

Daystar Television Network Pvt Ltd.vsWord Of God Fellowship Inc./d/b/a/Daystar Television Network

Daystar Television Network Pvt Ltd. challenged Word Of God Fellowship Inc., claiming infringement and passing off related to its registered trademark 'DAYSTAR TELEVISION NETWORK'. The appellant sought permanent injunctions against downlinking, distribution, and use of the mark in India. However, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeals, finding that the respondent was honestly using their pre-existing global business name. Furthermore, the court held that since the program was originally designed by the respondent, they retained original ownership rights, preventing restrictions on their usage.

patentCS (Comm.) No.: 84/2020

adidas AG / adidas India Marketing Private LimitedvsMr. Anwar Ali

Adidas AG and its Indian subsidiary filed a suit against Mr. Anwar Ali for infringing their registered trademarks ("adidas", "three bars", etc.) and copyrights on shoes and accessories. The court found that the defendant was manufacturing, stocking, and selling inferior quality goods using deceptively similar marks, causing damage to Adidas' reputation.

patentCS(COMM) 330/2022

M/S JK Lakshmi Cement LimitedvsRaj Kumar Singla Trading As M/S Shiv Shakti Sanitary Store & Anr.

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of M/S JK Lakshmi Cement Limited against Raj Kumar Singla Trading As M/S Shiv Shakti Sanitary Store. The court found that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case of trademark infringement, leading to the restraint on the defendants from using the 'JK Smart' mark for wall putty and related products. Furthermore, the Court appointed a Local Commissioner to seize infringing goods and inspect the defendant's accounts, reinforcing the immediate protective measures available in IP litigation.

patentCS (COMM) 422/2020 & I.A.9022/2020

Mrs. Anugya GuptavsMr. Ajay Kumar & Anr.

This Delhi High Court order addresses a dispute concerning the use of the trademark 'SARKARI RESULT' and associated domain names. The core issue revolves around establishing who is the prior adopter and user of the mark by comparing the actions of the Plaintiff and Defendants. The court has listed the matter for further hearing, indicating that the substantive determination of rights remains pending.

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