India Trademark Cases
2,115 decisions indexed
Page 49 of 71 · 2,115 total
Rubinetterie Bresciane Bonomi Spa v.M/S.Lehry Instrumentation & Valves Pvt. Ltd.
This case involves an Italian company, Rubinetterie Bresciane Bonomi Spa, which filed a suit against M/S.Lehry Instrumentation & Valves Pvt. Ltd. for passing off its trademark and design mark used on brass ball valves. The dispute escalated when the appellant challenged procedural orders passed during the trial process. The Madras High Court ultimately dismissed the appeal, holding that the impugned interlocutory orders did not qualify as 'judgments' under the Letters Patent, thereby rendering the appeals non-maintainable despite the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act.
Parthasarathy Seniammal Educational Trust v.V.Rangasamy Naidu Educational Trust
This appeal before the Madras High Court addressed a dispute between two educational trusts regarding alleged trademark infringement and passing off. The appellants argued that mere abbreviations should not be considered infringement, while the respondents maintained that the single judge's decision was sound. The court ultimately dismissed the appeal but left all substantive issues open for resolution in the pending injunction application.
Srmb Srijan Private Limited v.Shreegopal Concrete Private Limited
The Calcutta High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Srmb Srijan Private Limited against Shreegopal Concrete Private Limited. The dispute centered on the 'X-Ribs' surface pattern used on TMT bars, which the plaintiff claimed constituted a distinctive trade dress and trademark acquired through long use and extensive marketing. The court found a strong prima facie case for passing off, noting that the defendant was using an identical imitation of the plaintiff's unique product indicia. This ruling reinforces the protection afforded to unregistered trade dress when demonstrating consumer association.
Sae India v.Delta Inc.
Sae India filed a civil suit against Delta Inc., alleging multiple infringements, including trademark violation (SAE INDIA, BAJA), copyright infringement related to standards and rules, and passing off. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions and damages. However, both parties agreed that the defendant had ceased all business operations, leading the plaintiffs to withdraw the suit.
Pidilite Industries Limited v.Golden Glue and others
Pidilite Industries Limited filed a Commercial IP Suit against Golden Glue and others alleging passing off. The court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and also passed an interim order granting injunctions to protect the plaintiff's brand identity and packaging design.
S.S White Burs,Inc v.S.S. WHITE DENTAL PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court addressed ongoing trademark disputes between S.S White Burs,Inc and S.S. White Dental Pvt Ltd, which had previously been stayed pending decisions by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). Noting significant delays due to the non-appointment of technical members at IPAB, the court issued directions. The parties were directed to seek a status report from the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP) regarding the appointment process, highlighting the potential harassment and delay faced by litigants.
Procter And Gamble Home Products Pvt. Ltd. v.Kani Soap Works
The Plaintiff filed a Commercial IP Suit alleging that the Defendant was using the Plaintiff's trade dress and label on detergent powder with clear intent to infringe the mark and pass off goods. The Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an ad-interim order restraining the Defendant from using the ARIEL ATOMIUM and TIDE marks/trade dress pending final disposal of the suit.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.J.K.Enterprises
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed a Commercial IP Suit against J.K.Enterprises regarding trademark infringement related to detergent powder. The Bombay High Court granted leave and passed an order restraining the Defendant from manufacturing, marketing, or selling goods using marks similar to the Plaintiff's distinctive trademarks WHEEL and Device of SPLAT.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Nashirbhai Mohmedali Mansuri And Anr
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed a Commercial IP Suit against Nashirbhai Mohmedali Mansuri and others alleging infringement of its well-known trademark 'Vim', associated logos, and trade dress. The court granted the leave petition and passed an interim order.
Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd. v.Sri Sai Bhavani Handloom House and others
The petitioner, Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd., filed a commercial IP suit against Sri Sai Bhavani Handloom House and others alleging passing off of its registered trademark "Meena Prints". The court granted an interim order restraining the defendants from using deceptively similar marks like "Meera Prints" on textile goods.
Biogen International Gmbh v.Jayesh Shah
The court passed an order disposing of several applications filed by both parties. The existing interim injunction was confirmed, and the defendant was permitted to sell their existing stock of 'DYFIRA' under specific conditions. This permission required the defendant to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs.30 lacs to secure potential damages.
Wockhardt Limited v.Chematac Pharmaceuticals
Wockhardt Limited filed a Commercial IP Suit against Chematac Pharmaceuticals alleging passing off due to deceptively similar packaging. The court granted leave and passed an interim order restraining the defendant from using packaging that could mislead consumers into believing their product was associated with Wockhardt.
patanjali ayurved ltd v.axiom ayurveda
Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. sued Axiom Ayurveda for trademark infringement, alleging that Axiom was using the terms 'endorsed by Maharishi Patanjali Ayurved Foundation Trust' and 'endorsed by Maharishi Patanjali Yogpeeth Foundation Trust' on their products, creating a deceptive association with Patanjali’s trademarks PATANJALI and PATANJALI AYURVED. The plaintiff claimed significant revenue (approximately Rs. 9,000 crores) and widespread distribution of its products under the contested marks.
Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited & Anr. v.Mr. Ajay Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited (Times Group) against the defendants for infringing their intellectual property rights. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants were illegally making available electronic copies of 'The Times of India' and 'The Economic Times,' as well as using the plaintiff's logo on their website without authorization. The court found a prima facie case of infringement and passing off, leading to an order restraining the use of the trademarks and copyrighted works, and directing the locking of the infringing domain name.
Nv Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. v.A.D.S Spirits Pvt. Ltd.
In this commercial suit concerning trademark and copyright infringement, the Delhi High Court allowed Nv Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. to file crucial additional documentation. The plaintiff sought permission to submit legal proceedings certificates and invoices related to their BESTO whisky brand. After considering arguments from both sides, the court granted leave for the documents to be taken on record, provided the plaintiff pays a cost of Rs. 15,000/-.
Noor Hospital Trust And 7 Ors v.Sajid Ali Khan
The Bombay High Court addressed a commercial IP suit concerning the alleged passing off of a hospital's trademark. The Plaintiffs, Noor Hospital Trust, sought to restrain the Defendant from using 'NEW NOOR HOSPITAL,' claiming deceptive similarity to their established mark 'NOOR HOSPITAL.' The court framed multiple issues covering passing off, descriptiveness of the term 'NOOR,' and claims for damages and injunctions, setting a clear path for the evidence phase.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v.Maxworth Pharma Pvt. Ltd.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. filed a suit against Maxworth Pharma Pvt. Ltd. regarding alleged trademark infringement concerning the medicinal preparation 'PANTOCID'. The Bombay High Court granted leave and further issued an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the deceptively similar trade mark "MAX PANTOCID" or any other similar marks.
Jasper Infotech Private Limited v.Aadi Sins & Ors
The Delhi High Court issued a significant interim order in favor of Jasper Infotech Private Limited regarding its SNAPDEAL trademarks. The court restrained the newly impleaded defendants from infringing the trademarks or passing off their business as affiliated with the plaintiff. Crucially, the court directed several domain registrars to immediately suspend numerous domains that were allegedly used for fraudulent activities related to the brand, and also ordered a freeze on specific bank accounts.
Digigen Systems Pvt. Ltd. v.Hasmi T.
Digigen Systems Pvt. Ltd. filed a Commercial IP Suit against Hasmi T. regarding the alleged infringement of their trade mark 'VIDVIE'. The court granted an interim order restraining the defendant from using the disputed trademark on mobile phone accessories until the final hearing.
Nadeem Majid Oomerbhoy v.Rashid Sattar Oomerbhoy & Ors
The Bombay High Court intervened in a court-supervised licensing process for proprietary edible oil trademarks, citing concerns over the integrity of the bidding. The Judge found that media reports suggesting bias had compromised the neutrality of the auction, leading to only two bidders remaining (the Plaintiff and one Defendant). Consequently, the Court Receiver was directed to halt the current proceedings, return all existing deposits, and reissue advertisements under strict conditions of silence from all parties.
Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited v.Patanjali Ayurved Limited
The Delhi High Court addressed a suit filed by Reckitt Benckiser against Patanjali Ayurved concerning alleged trademark infringement, passing off, and unfair trade practices related to toilet cleaner advertisements. The core dispute centered on misleading claims made in both original and revised advertisements regarding the use of hydrochloric acid and product naturalness. While the plaintiff sought to challenge the defendant's revised advertisement, the Court permitted Reckitt Benckiser to amend its plaint, allowing the litigation to proceed while preserving the rights of Patanjali Ayurved.
Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd. v.Sri Sai Bhavani Handloom House and others
The petitioner, Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd., filed a commercial IP suit against Sri Sai Bhavani Handloom House and others regarding alleged trademark infringement/passing off. The court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim order restraining the defendants from using deceptively similar marks like "Meena Prints" or "Meera Prints" on their textile goods.
Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd. v.Sri Sai Bhavani Handloom House
The petitioner, Meena Prints Pvt. Ltd., filed a commercial IP suit against Sri Sai Bhavani Handloom House and others regarding alleged passing off of its registered trademark "Meena Prints". The court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using deceptively similar marks.
dharampal satyapal sons pvt ltd v.mr satish kumar
Dharampal Satyapal Sons Pvt Ltd (Plaintiff) sued Mr. Satish Kumar & Ors (Defendants) for infringement of their registered trademark 'PULSE' on candies, alleging deceptive similarity to the Defendants’ brand ‘PLUS’ and trade dress. Both parties were selling candies in class 30, with the Plaintiff claiming significant market share and goodwill.
Sopariwala Exports And Anr. v.Satyapal Shivkumar
The Bombay High Court vacated an earlier ex-parte order that had recognized the Plaintiff's prior use of the trademark 'PAN RAAS'. The court found that the statement claiming the Plaintiffs conceived and adopted the distinctive mark in 2008 was incorrect, noting that the word 'RAAS' was adopted after a compromise with Rasana Private Limited. This decision significantly impacts the Plaintiff's claim regarding the originality and priority of their trademark rights.
Hanuman Candle Works v.M/S Ashwini Candle Industry
The Gauhati High Court disposed of an appeal concerning alleged infringement of a trademark and copyright related to candle artwork. The respondent agreed to refrain from using the disputed artwork ('MAYUR'), leading the court to make its previous interim injunction order absolute. However, the core issue regarding concurrent usage of the 'MAYUR' trademark remains pending before the Registrar of Trademarks, necessitating further action by both parties.
Maharshi Packaging Machines Pvt. Ltd. v.M/S Maharshi Udyog Thru Partner, Bhagvat Vitthaldas Shah
The Gujarat High Court stayed a commercial trademark civil suit after hearing an appeal challenging the trial court's refusal to frame an issue regarding the validity of the plaintiff's trademark registration. The petitioner argued that since they had filed a rectification application under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, before the IPAB, the Civil Court should not have ruled on the matter unilaterally. The court agreed that the trial court needed to properly consider the pending statutory proceedings, leading to the stay.
Mr.A.D.Padmasingh Issac Trading as Aachi Spices and Foods / M/s.Aachi Masala Foods (P)Ltd. v.Nutriyes Healthcare Pvt Ltd
Aachi Spices and Foods filed a civil suit alleging that Nutriyes Healthcare Pvt Ltd was infringing upon its copyright and passing off its brand, 'AACHI RAGI FLOUR.' The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions against the unauthorized use of similar marks on ragi flour products. After establishing jurisdiction and presenting ex-parte evidence, the court found in favor of the plaintiffs, granting injunctive reliefs and directing the surrender of infringing materials. Furthermore, given the defendant's failure to appear despite being duly served, the court awarded significant compensatory costs.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Reva Sree Industries
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion against Reva Sree Industries alleging infringement of its trademarks (OK and WHEEL) and passing off through the use of similar trade dress on detergent products. The court granted an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the infringing marks/trade dress pending final disposal.
Unilever Plc. v.HAD Enterprises
Unilever Plc. filed a suit alleging that Had Enterprises was violating its trademarks (LAKME, LAKME EYECONIC, etc.) by selling products using deceptive marks and logos. The court addressed motions related to the investigation of these IP violations.
Facing a trademark dispute?
Arctic's TM litigation team handles ~120 trademark matters per year across India, EU, and UK. From oppositions to infringement actions, we build winning arguments from precedent.