Metro Institutes of Medical Sciences Pvt Ltd v. Metro International Cardiac Centre & Ors

TM No.01/2014

The plaintiff, Metro Institutes of Medical Sciences Pvt Ltd, filed a suit seeking an injunction against the defendants for using the 'METRO' trade name/trademark in respect of medical services. The plaintiff claimed extensive goodwill and reputation associated with its hospitals under the METRO brand. However, the court dismissed the interim injunction application, finding that the plaintiff lacked a prima facie case and there was no evidence suggesting the defendant was a dishonest concurrent user.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi District Court
Case Number
TM No.01/2014
Decision Date
4 February 2015

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Delhi District Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Metro Institutes of Medical Sciences Pvt Ltd vs Metro International Cardiac Centre & Ors is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademarkCS (COMM) 492/2022 & I.As. 11270-11271/2022

akash aggarwalvsflipkart internet private limited

Akash Aggarwal, owner of the 'V Tradition' trademark for women's clothing, sued Flipkart alleging that the platform’s ‘latching on’ feature allowed third-party sellers to use his brand name and product images without consent, constituting passing off. The Plaintiff claimed significant sales and consumer engagement through Flipkart before this unauthorized usage.

trademarkOP (TM) No.23 of 2025

M/s.Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP.vsM/s.Sangeetham House of Veg

The Madras High Court allowed a petition seeking the rectification and cancellation of a conflicting trademark. The petitioner, M/s.Sangeetha Caterers, successfully argued that the respondent's mark, 'SANGEETHAM HOUSE OF VEG,' was registered in bad faith after a court decree had already mandated the respondent to change their business name to 'Hotel Raagam - House of Veg.' The Court held that the registration was voidable because it suppressed prior litigation and compromise terms, ordering the Registrar of Trademarks to remove the conflicting mark forthwith.

trademark903-IAL-5694-22 (Interim Application in Commercial IPR Suit (L) No. 5688 of 2022)

Jupiter Life Line Hospitals LimitedvsAatmaj Healthcare Private Limited

Jupiter Life Line Hospitals Limited sought an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against Aatmaj Healthcare Private Limited for alleged infringement of its registered trademark 'JUPITER' (Registration No. 1675980). The plaintiff claimed that the defendants were using similar marks, such as "StayGo Jupiter Multispecialty Hospital," in relation to running hospitals and providing medical services. The court found a strong prima facie case for infringement and granted the interim injunction.

trademarkC.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 542/2022

Veekesy Rubber Industries Pvt Ltd.vsKamal Bansal

The Delhi High Court allowed a rectification petition filed by Veekesy Rubber Industries Pvt Ltd. against Kamal Bansal, directing the removal of the registered trademark 'VKG'. The court found that 'VKG' was confusingly similar to the petitioner's prior and well-established mark 'VKC', which had been used since 1985 in respect of footwear. Crucially, the court noted that the respondent failed to demonstrate actual use of the impugned mark, leading it to conclude that the registration was obtained dishonestly to trade upon the petitioner's goodwill.

trademarkCOMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO.598 OF 2019

Unilever PlcvsKanha Dairy and Food Products

Unilever Plc filed a commercial IP suit against Kanha Dairy and Food Products alleging infringement and passing off related to the 'FEAST' trademark. The court granted leave under the Letters Patent Act, decreed the suit in favor of Unilever, and issued perpetual injunctions against the defendant.

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