I Plus Inc. v. Consim Info Private Limited

NOTICE OF MOTION NO.516 OF 2006 IN SUIT NO.484 OF 2006

The Bombay High Court dismissed I Plus Inc.'s Notice of Motion seeking an injunction against Consim Info Private Limited regarding similar domain names, IndiaProperties.com and IndiaProperty.com. The court held that the terms 'India' and 'Property' are generic and descriptive words, incapable of trademark protection. Furthermore, considering the extensive use and established goodwill of the defendant, the balance of convenience tilted in their favor, leading to the denial of interim relief.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Bombay High Court
Case Number
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.516 OF 2006 IN SUIT NO.484 OF 2006
Judge(s)
Anoop V. Mohta

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Bombay High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in I Plus Inc. vs Consim Info Private Limited is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademarkC.S.(Comm.Div.)No.200 of 2022

Junior Kuppanna Kitchens Pvt. Ltd.vsKuppanna Foods

Junior Kuppanna Kitchens Pvt. Ltd filed suit against Kuppanna Foods, among others, alleging multiple infringements across trademarks and copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions to stop the use of deceptively similar marks like 'KUPPANNA FOODS' and 'Kuppanna', as well as damages for dilution and tarnishment. Ultimately, the parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the Memorandum of Compromise.

trademarkCS(COMM) 400/2018 & CC 4/2008

General Mills Inc.vsKaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd Federation

In this ongoing trademark dispute, General Mills Inc. sought to incorporate the registration of its mark 'TRIX' into the existing pleadings. The Delhi High Court accepted the amendment and subsequently framed a new, specific issue before the court. This new issue directly addresses whether the defendant's use of the 'TRIX' mark constitutes infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademark.

trademarkCOMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO.360 OF 2019

Kesari TrustvsKesari Tours and Travels

The plaintiffs filed a commercial IP suit against the defendant alleging infringement and passing off related to the use of the mark 'KESARI'. The court decreed the suit, granting perpetual injunctions against the defendant for using the mark in relation to various businesses.

trademarkCS(COMM) 483/2021

Macleods Pharmaceuticals LimitedvsM/S Skynet Placements & Ors.

The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Macleods Pharmaceuticals Limited against M/S Skynet Placements & Ors. The court found a prima facie case that the defendants were using the plaintiff's registered trademark 'MACLEODS' for deceptive purposes, specifically related to fake job offers. Consequently, the defendants were restrained from promoting or offering services under the mark, and banks were directed to freeze specific accounts linked to the alleged fraudulent activity.

trademarkC.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 151/2021 (and connected matters)

Universal City Studios LlcvsM/S Select Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. And Anr.

In a series of related trademark appeals, the Delhi High Court allowed applications filed under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC for substitution of the respondent's name. The court permitted the change of Respondent No. 1 from 'Select Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.' to its assignee, 'Select Citywalk Retail Pvt. Ltd.', following an Assignment Deed executed on August 17, 2022. This procedural order ensures that all ongoing litigation concerning the assigned trademarks is correctly addressed by the new legal entity.

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