Mr. Peter Fanning, Chief Executive, The Chartered Institute Of Taxation v. M/s Institute Of Charted Tax Advisers Of India Limited

M/s. United Spirits LimitedvsHenkel India Limited

M/s. United Spirits Limited appealed against the denial of an interlocutory injunction concerning the trademark 'ARAMUSK'. The dispute arose from a complex chain of assignments and transfers related to the original business agreement between Shaw Wallace & Company (predecessor-in-interest) and Henkel India Limited. The court examined the three pillars required for granting temporary relief: prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. Ultimately, the appeals were dismissed as the appellant was found not to have a strong enough case or demonstrated irreparable harm.

Ashish AggarwalvsM/S Racing Promotions Pvt. Ltd.

The plaintiff, engaged in sports activities under his trademarks 'X1' and 'X1 WAR OF X-TREME SPEED', filed a suit against the defendant for infringing these marks. The court found that the defendant was using an identical and deceptively similar mark ('X1') in relation to similar services without permission.

Akums Drugs An Pharmaceuticals LimitedvsMedivinc Healthcare Pvt Ltd & Anr.

The Delhi High Court addressed several interlocutory applications in the trademark infringement suit filed by Akums Drugs against Medivinc Healthcare. The court granted exemptions for various procedural requirements, including pre-institution mediation and advance service to defendants. Crucially, the court allowed the plaintiffs' application for an ex parte ad-interim injunction, directing the appointment of Local Commissioners to secure evidence and prevent further infringement.

Electronica Semiconductors Pvst LtdvsNaveen Goel And Anr.

The Delhi High Court issued procedural orders in the trademark opposition proceedings involving Electronica Semiconductors Pvt Ltd against Naveen Goel and others. The court directed the parties to cure registry objections, provide necessary documentation, and file consolidated briefs of submissions within specified timelines. This order sets the stage for further substantive arguments regarding the trademark dispute.

Mr. M. Anees Ahmed (M/s Ambur Star Briyani)vsStar Ambur Briyani

The Madras High Court ruled in favor of Mr. M. Anees Ahmed, granting a permanent injunction against the respondent for trademark infringement and passing off. The court found that the defendant's use of 'STAR AMBUR BRIYANI' was deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered mark, 'AMBUR STAR BRIYANI,' which is associated with his restaurant business. While the claim for destruction of infringing stock was rejected due to lack of evidence, the suit was partly decreed.