Elofic Industries Limited v. Mobis India Limited

Sammaan Capital Limited & Ors.vsSvamaan Financial Services Private Limited & Ors.

The Delhi High Court disposed of appeals filed by Sammaan Capital Ltd and Sammaan Finserv Ltd against an injunction restraining them from using marks similar to Svamaan Financial Services Pvt Ltd's registered trademarks. While the court stayed the operation of the restrictive judgment, allowing the appellants to continue their use in the interim, it imposed strict conditions. The appellants must prominently display 'Formerly known as Indiabulls' and include a clear disclaimer stating they have no connection with Svamaan Financial Services Pvt Ltd.

S. Mehar Singh (Motion Levers India)vsMadan Lal Gupta & Co.

This Delhi High Court judgment addresses an appeal challenging the refusal to register the trade mark 'MLI' for sewing machine parts. The court examined whether the applicant could secure protection under Section 12(3) based on honest concurrent use, despite the existence of a prior registered mark 'ML' held by the respondents. Ultimately, the court dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence regarding sales and advertising expenditure before the opposition was filed, thereby negating claims of acquiescence or estoppel.

M/s.Mysore Sangam Agarbatti WorksvsM/s.Ganga Products

The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Mysore Sangam Agarbatti Works against the Registrar's decision rejecting its opposition to Ganga Products' trademark application for 'DEVICE OF LORD SHIVA'. The court held that names of Hindu deities are not exclusive and cannot be monopolized, citing established Supreme Court precedents. While dismissing the appeal, the court granted liberty to the appellant to seek cancellation under Section 47 if the mark is eventually registered.

Samsudeen AvsThe Registrar of Trade Marks / Salama Eye Hospital Limited

The Madras High Court allowed the appeal filed by Samsudeen A against the Registrar of Trade Marks' decision to abandon a trademark application. The core issue was whether service via email, as per TM Rules, was sufficient when the applicant claimed non-receipt of the opposition notice. Applying a purposive interpretation in the interest of justice, the court ruled that since the appellant could not prove receipt, he was deemed not to have received the notice, thereby quashing the abandonment order and allowing him a chance to file his counter-statement.

Ms Jagat Agro Commodities P LtdvsUnion Of India & Ors.

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Ms Jagat Agro Commodities P Ltd, directing the respondents (Union of India) to renew and restore its registered trademark 'JAGAT(DEVICE)'. The court found that the mandatory statutory notice (Form O-3) regarding the approaching expiry was not properly issued or served on the petitioner, thereby upholding the principle of natural justice. This decision emphasizes that a trademark proprietor should not be penalized for procedural lapses by the Registry.