Aravind Laboratories v. V.A. Samy Chemical Works

Kausal Goyal And & Ors.vsAwadh Oils Private Limited Through Its Director Shri Awadh Goyal

The Delhi High Court stayed an adverse ex-parte interim injunction against Kausal Goyal and others in a trademark dispute involving the mark 'Kala Ghoda'. The court found that the Appellants had established a prima facie case, particularly citing a family settlement agreement and long-standing use of the trademark. This decision allows the parties to proceed with a full hearing, preventing immediate prejudice to the appellants.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries LimitedvsWyeth Holdings Corporation And Anr.

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited against an interim order favoring Wyeth Holdings Corporation. The core dispute involved alleged infringement and passing off, where Wyeth held the registered trademark 'Pacitane' for anti-spasmodic preparations, and Sun used 'Parkitane'. The court found that due to the identical field of activity, common composition (Trihexylphenidyl), and high likelihood of consumer confusion, the appellants' use was fraudulent. Consequently, the court upheld the protective order granted to Wyeth.

Lupin LimitedvsTablets (India) Limited

The Madras High Court set aside an earlier rejection order in favor of Lupin Limited, allowing its appeal against the registration of the mark 'CEFTRIL'. The court found that the Registrar's conclusion—that Lupin did not use its prior mark 'CEFF'—was erroneous and contradicted the evidence presented. Furthermore, given the 1st respondent's willingness to seek cancellation, the High Court directed the removal of the disputed trade mark from the register.

Fontaine LimitedvsVinod Mahadik & Anr.

Fontaine Limited successfully petitioned the Delhi High Court for the cancellation of a conflicting trademark, 'impugned mark,' registered by Vinod Mahadik & Anr. The Petitioner demonstrated that the Respondent had failed to use the mark continuously for over five years, providing evidence of non-use through investigator reports and online searches showing inactivity. Given the Respondent's failure to appear despite substituted service, the Court allowed the petition, directing the cancellation of the conflicting registration.

Up Hotels Clarks LimitedvsArjun Bhanot Trading As Arjun Clarks Inn and Anr.

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Up Hotels Clarks Limited, cancelling a competing trademark registration held by Arjun Bhanot Trading As Arjun Clarks Inn. The court found that the respondent's mark was deceptively similar to the petitioner's established 'CLARKS' brand, which possesses significant goodwill and reputation dating back decades. Despite the respondent's claims of honest adoption, the court determined that the similarity, coupled with the identical class of services (hotels/restaurants), created a high likelihood of consumer confusion, thus violating trademark law.