India Trademark Cases
2,115 decisions indexed
Page 50 of 71 · 2,115 total
Asian Paints Limited v.Agrasen Paints and Chemicals
Asian Paints Limited filed a Notice of Motion seeking an injunction against Agrasen Paints and Chemicals for alleged infringement of the distinctive trade mark UTSAV and associated trade dress. The Bombay High Court granted the requested relief, restraining the Defendant from using similar marks or trade dresses in relation to paints and distemper pending the final hearing.
Atlas Radio Traders v.Vijay Marketing
Atlas Radio Traders filed a Notice of Motion alleging that Vijay Marketing was engaging in passing off by using the mark 'JZ CROWN' on electronic goods, which is deceptively similar to Atlas Radio Traders' prior trade mark 'CROWN'. The Bombay High Court granted an interim injunction restraining the Defendant from manufacturing or selling such goods until the final disposal of the suit.
Unilever Plc v.Golden Assam Tea Depot
Unilever Plc filed an IP suit against Golden Assam Tea Depot for trademark infringement. The dispute centered on the defendant's use of the impugned trade mark "Sipton" and other deceptively similar marks in relation to tea products, which infringed upon Unilever's registered trademarks, particularly "Lipton".
Luxembourg Brands S.A R.L & Anr v.G.M Pens International Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court partially decreed the suit for trademark infringement and passing off. Despite previous settlements where the defendant agreed to cease using certain marks, the court found that the defendant continued manufacturing and selling products under the mark 'TERAMAX'. Consequently, the court imposed a penalty of ₹5 lakh on the company's directors and mandated a detailed accounting and independent audit of all net revenue earned from the infringing sales.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Reva Sree Industries
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed an IP suit against Reva Sree Industries alleging that the latter was using a mark (OK WELL) and trade dress deceptively similar to HUL's established marks (OK and WHEEL) and packaging. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an ad-interim injunction.
Great White Global Pvt. Ltd. v.Sameer Kumar And 6 Others
The petitioner, Great White Global Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit against Sameer Kumar and others alleging infringement of its copyrights and trademarks. The court granted leave under the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim order recognizing the plaintiff's cause of action for infringement.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Raj Enterprise
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a suit against Raj Enterprise alleging infringement related to its detergent preparations, specifically concerning the use of an impugned pirated trade dress and 'Wheel Device'. The Bombay High Court granted leave under the Letters Patent Act and passed an order granting interim relief.
Kama Ayurveda Private Limited v.Rwl Healthworld Ltd. & Ors
Kama Ayurveda sought an interim injunction against Rwl Healthworld, alleging that the defendant's product packaging was deceptively similar to its own 'Eladi Hydrating Ayurvedic Face Cream,' thereby constituting passing off. The Delhi High Court examined both products and found material distinctions in shape, color scheme (gold/cream vs. white/off-white), and floral patterns. Ultimately, the court concluded that a common purchaser would not be misled, dismissing the plaintiff's application for an interim order.
Biofarma v.Bal Pharma Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed Biofarma's suit against Bal Pharma Limited concerning passing off and trade dress infringement. The court found that the plaintiff could not claim exclusive rights over the term 'MEX' because it was an acronym ('Metformin Extended Release') derived from the principal drug ingredient, rendering it descriptive and publici juris in the pharmaceutical trade. Consequently, the defendant was permitted to continue using the mark without infringing on the plaintiff’s established brand.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Bharath Trading Co.
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion seeking an injunction against Bharath Trading Co. and others for allegedly using a trade mark identical or deceptively similar to its 'SPLAT' device mark in relation to detergent preparations. The court allowed the leave petition and granted an interim injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing, marketing, or selling goods under the impugned mark pending final disposal of the suit.
M/s.MRF Limited v.Multi Race Force Lubricants Pvt. Ltd
The Madras High Court ruled in favor of M/s. MRF Limited, finding that the defendant's use of similar marks constituted trademark infringement and passing off. The court applied the 'average purchaser' test, concluding that the overall similarity between the marks and packaging was likely to mislead an ordinary consumer. Consequently, the suit was decreed with a perpetual injunction restraining further misuse of the mark.
Netsweeper Technologies Private Limited v.Netsweeper Inc.
Netsweeper Technologies Private Limited filed a suit against Netsweeper Inc. alleging passing off and unauthorized use of its registered trademark, 'NETSWEEPER'. The plaintiff, based in Canada, claimed that the defendants were wrongfully associating themselves with its brand to sell similar software services. The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants, confirming the original injunction granted in favor of Netsweeper Technologies Private Limited.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.R. R. Trading Company
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed a Notice of Motion seeking an injunction against R.R. Trading Company for allegedly using a label mark and trade dress deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's distinctive BROOK BOND RED LABEL/RED LABEL. The Bombay High Court granted the leave petition and passed an interim order restraining the defendant from manufacturing, marketing, or selling goods that pass off as those of the plaintiff.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Jmd Oil Private Limited
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion seeking an injunction against JMD Oil Private Limited for alleged infringement of its trade dress and marks. The court granted the leave petition and subsequently passed an order granting an interim injunction.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Jmd Oil Private Limited
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion against JMD Oil Private Limited alleging infringement through the use of pirated trade dress in detergent and personal care products. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an order granting interim injunctions.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd v.R. R. Trading Company
Hindustan Unilever Ltd filed a Notice of Motion against R.R. Trading Company alleging that the defendant was using a label mark and trade dress deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's distinctive BROOK BOND RED LABEL/RED LABEL for tea products. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim injunction restraining the defendant from passing off their goods.
Jawed Habib Hair And Beauty Limited v.Manoj Kumar Sharma
The petitioner, Jawed Habib Hair And Beauty Limited, filed an IP Suit against Manoj Kumar Sharma regarding alleged infringement of its trade marks. The court granted leave to the defendant and passed an interim order restraining him from using 'JAWED HABIB' or 'JH' in connection with hair salon services pending the final hearing.
M/s.P.S.Arumugam Associates v.M/s.Very Good Foods
The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal filed by M/s.P.S.Arumugam Associates against M/s.Very Good Foods, upholding the original finding that no infringement occurred. The court found insufficient evidence to establish deceptive similarity between the labels 'Chakra' and 'VG', noting differences in product descriptions and names. Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to adequately prove specific financial loss caused by the defendant's marketing.
Kokanratna Holiday Resorts Limited v.Millennium & Copthorne International Limited
The Bombay High Court granted a limited ad-interim relief to Kokanratna Holiday Resorts Limited, protecting its use of the name 'Hotel Millennium Park' and associated domain. The court ruled that pending the final suit, the Defendant must provide at least 7 days prior written notice before initiating any legal action claiming infringement or passing off against the Plaintiff. This decision provides immediate protection against groundless threats while the main litigation proceeds.
Powerhouse Licensing LLC v.Ashok Banwarilal Gupta Trading As Qs
In this Bombay High Court matter concerning alleged trademark infringement, the court accepted an undertaking from the defendants. The defendants committed to refraining from using the trademark or trade name 'POWERHOUSE' across all platforms, including websites and social media. This interim order allows the case to proceed while securing immediate protection for the petitioner's brand.
Vennila Clothing Company v.M/s.Arrs Silks
The Madras High Court modified existing interim injunctions in a dispute between Vennila Clothing Company and M/s.Arrs Silks regarding trademark and trade dress infringement. The court partially allowed the applications seeking to vacate the previous injunctions, establishing an interim arrangement where the defendants could use specified changed trade dresses for a period of eleven months. This decision allows the main suit to proceed while providing temporary relief to both parties.
Shambhu Nath & Brothers & Ors. v.Imran Khan
In the case concerning the trademark 'SNJ TOOFAN', the defendant, Imran Khan, filed an affidavit affirming that he has ceased using the mark and undertakes not to use it in the future. The court accepted this submission, allowing the matter to proceed while granting time for the plaintiffs to take instructions. This indicates a potential path toward resolution through settlement or compliance.
Unilever Plc. v.Bhanu Chauhan
Unilever Plc. filed a Notice of Motion seeking restraining orders against Bhanu Chauhan and others for using logos and trademarks deceptively similar to Unilever's well-known brands (DOMEX). The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim order.
M/s.Amilal Ramkishan Dass v.Ashok Kumar Sethi
The main suit involved a claim by M/s.Amilal Ramkishan Dass against Ashok Kumar Sethi for copyright infringement and passing off related to their Henna products bearing the mark 'AMIN'S'. The defendant filed an application seeking rejection of the plaint, primarily arguing lack of jurisdiction. The court dismissed the application, finding that the cause of action arose within its territorial jurisdiction.
Magnolia Ltd. v.Softgel Health Care Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court granted a temporary injunction favoring Magnolia Ltd. against Softgel Health Care Pvt. Ltd. The court ordered that pending the final disposal of the suit, the defendant is restrained from manufacturing, selling, exporting, or using the disputed trademark 'VAGICLIN Plus' in connection with any pharmaceutical product. This interim order significantly protects the plaintiff's brand rights while the main infringement case proceeds.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Sainath Enterprise
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a commercial suit against Sainath Enterprise alleging that the defendant was using an identical or deceptively similar label mark and trade dress on their detergent powder, thereby passing off their goods as those of the plaintiff. The court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent Act and passed an interim order.
Joy Creators Pvt Ltd v.Natures Essence Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court addressed a trademark infringement suit concerning the use of 'Honey & Almonds' in cosmetic products. While the Plaintiff sought an injunction against the Defendant's use of the phrase, the court allowed the Defendant to continue using 'Almond and Honey' as a descriptive ingredient term. However, strict conditions were imposed on packaging design, ensuring that this descriptive phrase does not gain undue prominence over the Defendant's own trademark, 'Nature's Essence'.
Bharathi Consumer Care Products Pvt. Ltd v.Ganesh Industries
Bharathi Consumer Care Products Pvt. Ltd filed a civil suit against Ganesh Industries alleging multiple infringements, including the unauthorized use of a deceptively similar trademark (MAXX), copyright violation in packaging art, and passing off related to detergent products. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions and damages for these illegal activities. Both parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement, which was formalized through a Memorandum of Compromise.
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v.Joshi Products
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed an IP suit against Joshi Products alleging infringement of its copyrighted artistic label and distinctive trade dress for its detergent powder, WHEEL. The Bombay High Court granted leave to defend the suit and subsequently decreed it in favor of HUL.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Lite Detergent Soap
Hindustan Unilever Limited filed a Notice of Motion against Lite Detergent Soap. The Bombay High Court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent and also granted specific interim reliefs sought by the plaintiff, which will remain in force until further orders.
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.