Shyam Steel Industries Limited v. Shyam Sel And Power Limited & Anr.

Societe Des Produits Nestle S AvsThe Registrar Of Trade Marks

Nestle appealed a trademark refusal order from the Trademark Registry to the Delhi High Court. The original rejection was based on the mark being non-distinctive and similar to existing registered marks. Due to procedural issues following the dissolution of the IPAB, Nestle had to file a fresh appeal in the High Court. The court accepted notice and scheduled further proceedings.

Shiva Tobacco CompanyvsMadan Lal Jain

The plaintiff, Shiva Tobacco Company, sought a restraining order against the defendant for allegedly infringing its registered trade mark 'TIGER' used on chewing tobacco. The plaintiff demonstrated long-standing use of the mark since 1955, while the defendant claimed prior usage since 1963. The court found that a prima facie case existed in favor of the plaintiff and granted temporary injunction.

Tata Power Solar Systems Limited & Anr.vsWww.Tatapowersolardealership.Co.In & Ors.

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction in favor of Tata Power Solar Systems Limited, finding that several defendants were infringing on its registered trademarks ('TATA' and 'TATA POWER SOLAR'). The court recognized the immense goodwill and reputation associated with the brand. Furthermore, the judgment included significant ancillary relief, directing the suspension of specific domain names and mandating the freezing and transfer of funds from bank accounts linked to the infringement activities into a designated RBI fund.

Fashion Chemicals GmbH & Co.KGvsRegistrar of Trade Marks

The Madras High Court allowed an appeal filed by Fashion Chemicals GmbH & Co.KG against the refusal of its trademark registration for 'REPELLAN'. The court found that the Assistant Registrar's original order was cryptic, non-speaking, and violated principles of natural justice because it failed to consider the appellant's detailed arguments regarding the difference in goods (textile vs. construction) between 'REPELLAN' and the cited mark 'REPELLIN'. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the Registrar was directed to publish the trademark for public opposition.

Hatsun Agro Product LimitedvsV.Shanmugam And S.Murugesan (Trading as Arokiya Foods)

Hatsun Agro Product Limited sought the cancellation of a registered trademark ('AROKIYA') held by V.Shanmugam and S.Murugesan, alleging non-usage for over five years under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act. The Madras High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the respondent's minor alteration to the mark (removing a device mark) did not constitute a substantial change affecting its identity. Furthermore, the court found no merit in the petitioner's claim regarding non-usage.