FMCG — India Trademark Cases
551 decisions indexed
Page 7 of 19 · 551 total
Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Limited v.Amul Electromech Private Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court issued interim orders in favor of Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Limited (Amul) against several defendants regarding trademark infringement. The court directed specific defendants to immediately suspend access to infringing domain names (like www.amulfans.com), block social media accounts, and remove product listings on e-commerce platforms like Amazon. For other intermediaries, the court mandated a 'notice and takedown' mechanism, requiring them to promptly remove any content bearing Amul's trademarks upon receiving notification from the plaintiff.
Khilender Gupta Trading As M/S Bobby Enterprises v.Rakesh Kumar Trading As M/S Sai Birbal Das Foods
The Delhi High Court allowed an appeal filed by Khilender Gupta (the defendant in the original suit) challenging a lower court's refusal to permit amendments to their written statement. The core issue was whether changing the claimed date of trademark use constituted an impermissible 'U-turn.' The Court ruled that since the petitioner was entitled to claim user from any date, and the amendment merely reflected newly discovered material, it was correctional in nature and should be allowed in the interest of justice.
Inter Ikea Systems Bv v.Devashish Rattan And Ors
Inter Ikea Systems Bv successfully secured an ex parte ad interim injunction against Devashish Rattan and others in the Delhi High Court. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were slavishly copying over 2300 product listings, including proprietary names, images, and descriptions from the IKEA website, falsely claiming association with the brand. The court found a prima facie case was made out, granting immediate relief to prevent irreparable harm to the internationally renowned 'IKEA' trademark and trade dress.
Red Bull Ag v.Vandana Chetankumar Maraviya Trading As Vandana Beverages & Ors.
In a trademark infringement suit, Red Bull Ag sought an interim injunction against Vandana Beverages for allegedly using similar marks and trade dresses. The Delhi High Court granted a temporary restraint order, compelling Defendants No. 1 and 3 to immediately cease the use of the disputed marks and remove online advertisements. Crucially, the court allowed them to continue selling existing stock already manufactured and distributed, balancing protection of IP rights with commercial realities.
Rspl Health Private Limited v.Reckitt And Colman Overseas Hygiene Home Ltd.
This Delhi High Court order addresses an infringement suit filed by Rspl Health Private Limited against Reckitt And Colman Overseas Hygiene Home Ltd. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant's use of 'XPERT' in its registered word mark, 'HARPIC DRAIN XPERT,' infringed upon the plaintiff's device mark registration. While the court acknowledged the merits of the dispute, it primarily issued procedural directions, allowing the suit to proceed and setting timelines for filing written statements and interim replies.
Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. v.M/S.Himachal Milk Food Products
Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. filed a civil suit against M/S.Himachal Milk Food Products alleging infringement of its trademarks and copyrights, specifically concerning the use of similar containers and labels on dairy products like Ghee. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions and damages for passing off. However, before the court could rule on the merits of the case, the plaintiff moved to withdraw the suit, which was subsequently granted by the Madras High Court.
Commissioner Of Service Tax, Kolkata v.M/s. McLeod Russel (India) Limited
The Revenue appealed an order dropping demands for Service Tax on royalties paid by M/s. McLeod Russel (India) Limited to a foreign company for using licensed trademarks and patents related to tea production. The Tribunal held that since the trade marks and patents were not registered in India, they did not qualify as Intellectual Property Rights under Indian law 'for the time being in force', thus making the royalty payment non-taxable.
Pidilite Industries Limited v.Mr. X, Trading As, M/S Prabhat Store
In a trademark infringement case concerning Pidilite Industries Limited's products (FEWIKWIK and M-SEAL), the Delhi High Court granted an extension for its local commissioners. The court allowed the plaintiff to continue seizing counterfeit goods based on new market evidence, ensuring that enforcement actions could proceed until the next hearing date. This order maintains the status quo regarding anti-counterfeiting measures while allowing defendants time to prepare their defense.
Sunit Shah v.Sunshine Food Products
The Delhi High Court addressed an appeal challenging a lower court's decision regarding the trademark 'HOT MIX'. While the appellant argued that the mark had acquired distinctiveness, the High Court agreed with the trial court's initial finding that 'HOT MIX' is descriptive of the namkeen product. However, recognizing the need for justice, the Court directed the Trial Court to expedite the remaining proceedings and decide the suit promptly.
Dabur India Limited v.Goodluck Ayurveda Private Limited
Dabur India Limited successfully secured a decree against Goodluck Ayurveda Private Limited regarding the infringement and passing off of its trademark 'HONITUS.' The dispute was amicably resolved through mediation, leading to a Settlement Agreement. Under this agreement, the Defendant acknowledged Dabur's rights, agreed to cease using the infringing packaging/label/trade dress, modified their product presentation, and paid Rs. 1,00,000/- to the Plaintiff.
Visage Beauty & Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. v.Herbal Carts & Ors.
The Delhi High Court issued several crucial interim orders in the trademark infringement suit, Visage Beauty & Healthcare vs Herbal Carts & Ors. The court directed Fashnear Technologies Pvt. Ltd., an e-commerce intermediary, to provide contact details of sellers listing infringing products on its platform. Furthermore, the court allowed the impleadment of a proposed defendant involved in alleged collusion and deferred the request by Facebook Inc. to modify existing interim injunction terms regarding 'similar' vs. 'identical' URLs.
Chotiwala Food And Hotels Private Limited v.Chotiwala & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Chotiwala Food And Hotels Private Limited against Defendant No. 5, finding a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off. The Plaintiffs successfully demonstrated that their registered mark 'CHOTIWALA,' which has acquired significant goodwill over decades, was being deceptively used by the defendant. This order provides immediate protection to the established brand while the main litigation proceeds.
Mohan Breweries And Distilleries Limited v.M.P.Beer Products Private Limited
Mohan Breweries And Distilleries Limited filed a civil suit against M.P.Beer Products Private Limited, seeking permanent injunctions, damages, and accounts of profits for infringement of its registered trademarks, designs, and copyright related to beer bottles. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant was passing off their products as those of Mohan Breweries. However, due to the plaintiff's failure to prosecute the case effectively before the court, the Madras High Court dismissed the suit.
ITC Limited v.Raj Kumar Mittal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court addressed two separate applications in the dispute between ITC Limited and Raj Kumar Mittal & Ors. Regarding a request to use a new label, the court found that the proposed packaging did not appear deceptively similar to ITC's marks, thereby lifting the existing ad-interim injunction for this specific design. Separately, the Court initiated proceedings against Mr. Prem Chand Mittal for alleged assault and deliberate disobedience of previous orders.
M/S.Avon Emery Industries v.Sabko Industries
The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by M/S. Avon Emery Industries against an earlier ruling that rejected its application under Section 124 of the Trademarks Act, 1999. The court affirmed the trial court's decision after considering arguments from both sides regarding whether the original suit included claims for trademark infringement or only passing off. Given the respondent's clarification that the suit was solely for passing off, the High Court found no grounds to interfere with the lower court's order.
Virendra Kumar Gupta Trading As M/S Burger King v.Union Of India Through The Secretary & Ors.
This Delhi High Court order addresses a Writ Petition filed by Burger King, challenging the registration of a trademark. The petitioner argued that the Registry ignored their prior Notices of Opposition when granting registration to Respondent No. 4. However, the court noted that since the registration occurred before a key precedent was set, counsel for the respondent suggested that rectification might be the appropriate remedy instead of continuing with the current writ petition. The matter has been listed for further arguments.
Adani Wilmar Limited v.Baljit Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd.
This Delhi High Court order addresses a complex legal issue concerning the enforceability of trademark rights after a party voluntarily waives actionable claims related to that brand. The court specifically examined an affidavit where the defendant, Baljit Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd., declared they forewent any enforceable right in their unregistered brand 'Shubh Labh Fortune' for GST exemption purposes. Given the implications on the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Court directed the Department of Revenue to file its stand and submissions in the current proceedings.
Ds Intellectual Properties Llp & Anr v.Abhinav Singh & Ors
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Ds Intellectual Properties Llp & Anr against Abhinav Singh & Ors. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants were operating a fraudulent website using the 'Rajnigandha' trademark and DS Group trademarks to lure the public into fake distributorship schemes, while also infringing on copyright by copying the label layout. The court found a prima facie case was made out, leading to immediate restraining orders against the use of the marks and domain name, along with directives to suspend the domain and freeze associated bank accounts.
Artsana India Private Limited v.Vishanji Viijpar Savla
The plaintiff, Artsana India Private Limited, a subsidiary of Artsana SPA (Italy), claimed ownership of the well-known trademark "CHICCO" used for child care goods. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was fraudulently adopting and misusing this trademark to run his own business, causing dilution and loss. The court granted permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiff and awarded costs.
Ds Intellectual Properties Llp & Anr v.Ashutosh Kumar Singh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte interim injunction in favor of Ds Intellectual Properties Llp against Ashutosh Kumar Singh and others. The plaintiffs, owners of the 'Rajnigandha' trademark and associated copyrights, alleged that defendants were using a deceptive website ('www.rajnigandhadealership.online') to lure the public into fake distributorships under their brand name. Consequently, the court restrained the defendants from using the trademarks or the domain name and directed the domain registrar and bank to take immediate action.
Modern Snacks Pvt Ltd v.The Registrar Of Trade Mark
The Delhi High Court remanded an appeal filed by Modern Snacks Pvt Ltd regarding the rejection of its trademark application 'Modern Namkeen Karare Lal'. The core issue was whether the appellant could proceed with the appeal despite a previous rejection order from 2018. Recognizing the merits of the case, the court ordered the matter to be sent back to the Registrar for fresh consideration of the original review application. However, this remand is conditional: Modern Snacks must first prove that the prior rejection order was never properly communicated to them.
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s.Jaya Sai Traders
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited filed a civil suit seeking permanent injunctions against M/s.Jaya Sai Traders for alleged infringement of its registered trademark 'DHEEPAM' and copyright violation related to the packaging of lamp oil. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was using deceptively similar marks ('PANCHA DEEPAM OIL') and trade dress, leading to passing off. However, before the court could rule on the merits of the IP infringement claims, the plaintiff chose to withdraw the suit.
Ajinomoto Co Inc v.Dattatrey Studios & Anr.
Ajinomoto Co Inc successfully secured an interim injunction against Dattatrey Studios in the Delhi High Court. The plaintiff, owner of the registered trademark 'AJI-NO-MOTO,' argued that the upcoming movie title infringed its rights and was disparaging, linking the brand to negative health claims. The court granted the relief, preventing the release of any film bearing the disputed name until further hearing.
Siddhant Icecreams Llp v.Ameet Pahilani
In a significant interim order, the Delhi High Court facilitated an agreement between Siddhant Icecreams LLP (Plaintiffs) and Ameet Pahilani (Defendant No. 2). The court mandated that Defendant No. 2 cease using the terms 'Natural' and 'Naturals' in relation to ice creams across various media, including packaging and online platforms, to protect the Plaintiffs' trademark rights. However, the order provided specific carve-outs allowing the use of the mark 'NIC' under certain conditions within India and outside India, while also permitting the sale of existing stock until a specified date.
Kurlon Enterprises Ltd. v.M/S Goel Foam Co.
The plaintiff, Kurlon Enterprises Ltd., filed a suit alleging that the defendant, M/S Goel Foam Co., was misguiding customers by displaying the plaintiff's glow sign board and selling products under its name without authorization. The court found that the plaintiff successfully proved through documentary evidence that the defendant was infringing upon their trade mark and business reputation.
M/S Aadhar Products Pvt. Ltd. v.M/S Lotus Organic Care
M/S Aadhar Products Pvt. Ltd., a manufacturer of detergents, filed an appeal seeking to overturn the rejection of its application for a temporary injunction against M/S Lotus Organic Care. The appellant claimed that the respondent was infringing upon its registered trade mark 'Decide' and associated copyrights with its product 'Delite'. Despite arguments regarding prima facie infringement, the High Court found no legal infirmity in the trial court's decision to deny the injunction. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, but the Trial Court was directed to expedite the final disposal of the original suit.
M/s.Kaleeswari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s.Sri Dhanalakshmi Traders
This case involved a civil suit filed by M/s.Kaleeswari Refinery Private Limited against M/s.Sri Dhanalakshmi Traders, alleging infringement of their registered trademark 'Gold Winner' and violation of copyright through the use of the deceptively similar mark 'Niju Gold' on edible oil packaging. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions and an accounting of profits. However, both parties reached a mutual settlement agreement.
M/s.Kaleeswari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s.Sri Dhanalakshmi Traders
M/s.Kaleeswari Refinery Private Limited filed a suit against M/s.Sri Dhanalakshmi Traders alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'Gold Winner' and copyright in the associated artistic work and trade dress used on edible oil packaging. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions to restrain the defendant from using the deceptively similar mark 'Niju Gold' and passing off inferior products. Both parties subsequently reached a settlement, leading the Madras High Court to dispose of the captioned suit based on the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo.
Premier Nutritions Privat Limited v.Amit Product A Proprietary Connern
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Premier Nutritions Privat Limited against Amit Product A Proprietary Connern, finding that the defendant's use of 'DOODH MANTHAN' was deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark 'MANTHAN/PREMIER MANTHAN'. Furthermore, the court allowed the appointment of a Local Commissioner to conduct an inventory and seize infringing products, reinforcing the immediate protection available to IP holders facing market imitation.
Dfm Foods Ltd. v.Ms Nenimemi Foods Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
In this trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court granted a one-week extension to Defendant No. 1 to file its required affidavit. Crucially, the court also issued an assurance that the defendant would refrain from selling the disputed product under the 'CORN CURLS' trademark until the next hearing date. This interim order maintains the status quo while allowing procedural compliance in the ongoing infringement litigation.
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.