Allergan, Inc. v. The Registrar Of Trade Marks

C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 9/2021

Allergan, Inc. challenged the Registrar of Trade Marks' refusal to register its trademark in the Delhi High Court. The court initiated proceedings by issuing notice to the Registrar, allowing the defendant two weeks to file a response. This order sets the stage for a substantive hearing on whether Allergan meets the criteria for trademark registration.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 9/2021
Judge(s)
Sanjeev Narula

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Delhi High Court - Orders. Understanding the court's reasoning in Allergan, Inc. vs The Registrar Of Trade Marks is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademarkCS(COMM) 333/2024 & I.A. 9171/2024, I.A. 34980/2024

Mars IncorporatedvsRf Limited And Ors.

The Delhi High Court decreed the suit filed by Mars Incorporated against Rf Limited And Ors. following a comprehensive settlement between the parties. The dispute centered on the alleged infringement and passing off related to the distinctive packaging, trade dress, and branding of Mars' PEDIGREE pet food line. Under the terms of the settlement, the defendants acknowledged Mars' proprietary rights and agreed to cease manufacturing or marketing pet foods using an identical trade dress or get-up for their 'PETYUM' brand.

trademarkCS(COMM) 1109/2025

The Indian Hotels Company LimitedvsVivanta Stays & Ors.

The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of The Indian Hotels Company Limited against Vivanta Stays & Ors. The court recognized 'VIVANTA' as a well-known trademark and immediately restrained the defendants from using similar marks, such as VIVANTA STAYS/VIVANTA REALTY, both online and offline. Furthermore, the order mandated the immediate takedown of infringing websites and domain names, providing swift protection to the plaintiff's brand reputation.

trademarkOSA (CAD) Nos.15 to 19 of 2025

M/S.Sakthi Sai Safety Glass India & Sakthi Sai Glass Traders (Appellants)vsCompagnie De Saint-Gobain & Saint-Gobain India Private Limited (Respondents/Plaintiffs)

The Madras High Court dismissed appeals challenging an interim injunction granted to Saint-Gobain against Sakthi Sai Safety Glass India. The court found that the appellants, despite their contract with Saint-Gobain expiring, were infringing the 'Saint-Gobain' trademark by using it in connection with toughened glass products. Given the prima facie evidence of consumer confusion and dilution, the balance of convenience favored the trademark owner, upholding the injunction while allowing the main suit to proceed.

trademarkC.O. (Comm.Ipd-Tm) 4/2021

Arun Kumar MurarkavsRajesh Sultania & Anr

The Delhi High Court addressed applications filed by Arun Kumar Murarka concerning the trademark dispute against Rajesh Sultania & Anr. The core issue involves a petition seeking rectification/cancellation of the 'KAILASA' trademark (Reg. No. 4701472) due to its alleged deceptive similarity to the petitioner's mark, 'KAILASHA'. While an exemption application was allowed, the court proceeded by issuing notice to the defendant and listing the matter for further hearing on October 12, 2021.

trademarkCS(COMM) 231/2023

Inter Ikea Systems BvvsDevashish Rattan And Ors

Inter Ikea Systems Bv successfully secured an ex parte ad interim injunction against Devashish Rattan and others in the Delhi High Court. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were slavishly copying over 2300 product listings, including proprietary names, images, and descriptions from the IKEA website, falsely claiming association with the brand. The court found a prima facie case was made out, granting immediate relief to prevent irreparable harm to the internationally renowned 'IKEA' trademark and trade dress.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our TM 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 trademark matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call