Dhanam Textiles v. N.Varadaiah Trading as Ganesh Lungi Company

C.S.No.236 of 2020 and O.A.Nos.431 to 433 of 2020, A.No.2016 of 2020

Dhanam Textiles filed a suit against N.Varadaiah for alleged infringement of its registered trademark '360 BRAND,' copyright violation, and passing off concerning textile goods (lungies). The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions and damages due to the defendant's use of deceptively similar labels like '3600, 361, 369 BRAND.' Ultimately, the parties reached a compromise memo which was accepted by the court, leading to the suit being decreed in terms of that settlement.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Madras High Court
Case Number
C.S.No.236 of 2020 and O.A.Nos.431 to 433 of 2020, A.No.2016 of 2020
Judge(s)
G.Jayachandran

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Madras High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Dhanam Textiles vs N.Varadaiah Trading as Ganesh Lungi Company is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademark(T) OP (TM) Nos.319 & 320 of 2023

M/S.Gm Modular Private LimitedvsK.Dalpat Singh

The Madras High Court allowed petitions filed by M/S. Gm Modular Private Limited seeking the rectification of two rival trademarks, 'GM Pipe' and 'GMware'. The court found that the 1st Respondent adopted these marks with an ulterior motive to ride on the Petitioner’s established goodwill and reputation associated with the 'GM' brand since 1999. Despite arguments regarding differing classes of goods (Class 19 vs Class 17), the court held that the similarity and bad faith adoption justified removing the infringing marks from the Register.

trademark(T)OP(TM).Nos.99, 100 of 2023

M/s.Jaya Balaji TexvsSenniappan Kuppusamy; The Registrar of Trademarks

The Madras High Court dismissed two Original Petitions filed under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The petitions sought the removal of specific registered trademarks (No. 1607835 and No. 1464323) from the Register of Trademarks in Class 25. However, both parties reached an amicable resolution regarding the disputes, leading the petitioner to withdraw the cases before the court.

trademarkCS(COMM) 1141/2025

Kbm Foods Private LimitedvsAjay Yadav Trading As Sourav Masala Company

The Delhi High Court issued a comprehensive order in the trademark infringement suit filed by Kbm Foods Private Limited against Ajay Yadav Trading As Sourav Masala Company. The court granted several procedural exemptions, including waiving pre-institution mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Crucially, the court directed the appointment and execution of a Local Commissioner to seize goods bearing allegedly infringing marks, thereby providing immediate interim relief to the plaintiff while the main suit proceeds.

trademark2025:CHC-OS:225-DB

Ramji Lal AgarwalvsSourav Agarwal

This appeal before the Calcutta High Court addressed whether a dispute arising from a family arrangement, involving the use of the trade name 'Sindharam Sanwarmal', constituted a 'Commercial Dispute'. The plaintiff argued that the matter was purely familial and not commercial. However, the court found that the reliefs sought—specifically perpetual injunctions restraining the defendant from using or permitting others to use the trademark—manifestly demonstrated an intellectual property dispute. Consequently, the High Court held that the suit must be triable exclusively by a Commercial Court under the Act of 2015.

trademarkR/CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7 of 2025

Lincoln Pharmaceuticals Private LimitedvsRegistrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

The Gujarat High Court allowed Lincoln Pharmaceuticals' appeal against the rejection of its trademark registration for 'Glypanta'. The court ruled that despite initial objections under Section 11(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the applicant was entitled to proceed with the advertisement of the mark. This decision underscores the importance of following procedural steps like publication even when substantive objections exist.

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