Colgate Palmolive Company & Anr. v. Nixi & Anr.

Mineral Earth Sciences LlcvsX Development Llc

The Bombay High Court addressed the ongoing dispute between Mineral Earth Sciences Llc and X Development Llc concerning trademark matters. While no final decision was rendered on this date, the court maintained that any interim relief previously granted in the matter would continue to be effective until the next hearing date. The case is scheduled for further consideration on August 2nd, 2023.

Curewin Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.vsRegistrar Of Trademarks Govt. Of India

The Madhya Pradesh High Court granted an interim measure in the trademark opposition case filed by Curewin Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. against the Registrar of Trademarks, Government of India. The court directed that no further proceedings related to the specific publication date (11.08.2025) shall be taken until the next hearing date. This temporary stay provides crucial breathing room for the petitioner while procedural requirements are met.

Jindal Steel And Power LimitedvsJp Structures Private Limited

In this ongoing trademark infringement dispute, Jindal Steel And Power Limited challenged the trial court's decision to delete Defendant No. 1 (Jp Structures Private Limited) from the case. The petitioner argued that Defendant No. 1 was a necessary party because they were the original user of the infringing goods and disclosed the names of subsequent suppliers. The High Court directed notice be issued, ensuring the matter would be heard on July 3rd, allowing the dispute over party status to continue.

Dasaprakash Restaurant And Ice Cream Parlour Pvt.Ltd.vsThe Deputy Registrar of Trademarks

The Madras High Court dismissed an appeal filed by Dasaprakash Restaurant and Ice Cream Parlour Pvt.Ltd., which sought to record its rights as a subsequent proprietor of the 'Dasaprakash' trademark. The court upheld the Trademark Registry's rejection, ruling that the transfer agreement was void ab initio because it was executed while the original proprietor, Balakrishna Rao, was legally incompetent due to insolvency proceedings. Furthermore, the court emphasized that since the mark was a family mark jointly owned by legal heirs, no single proprietor could unilaterally transfer rights.

Hindustan Syringes And Medical Devices Ltd.vsThe Senior Examiner Of Trade Marks

The Delhi High Court addressed an appeal filed by Hindustan Syringes And Medical Devices Ltd. challenging the Senior Examiner's refusal to register the trademark 'DISPOSAFE'. While granting procedural exemptions regarding document submission, the court formally initiated the substantive appeal under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The petitioner argued that their unique combination mark should not have been rejected as generic or descriptive. The matter is now set for further hearing after notice has been issued to the Respondent.