Other — India Trademark Cases
226 decisions indexed
Page 4 of 8 · 226 total
Rpg Enterprises Limited v.RPG Location Through Rajendra Gupta
The suit involved Rpg Enterprises Limited alleging passing off against RPG Location. The defendant, Rajendra Gupta, stated he had no intention to infringe and agreed to remove the disputed logo and stop using the stylized mark 'RPG'.
Rpg Enterprises Limited v.RPG Location Through Rajendra Gupta
The suit involved Rpg Enterprises Limited alleging infringement and passing off against RPG Location. The defendant, Rajendra Gupta, stated he had no intention to infringe but agreed to remove the disputed logo and stop using the stylized mark 'RPG'.
Rajalakshmi Match Works v.Satpal Sindhi
The plaintiff, Rajalakshmi Match Works, filed a civil suit against several defendants seeking permanent injunctions to restrain them from passing off their safety matches as the plaintiff's by using the 'RAJHA'S SHRIFAL' trade mark and infringing the associated copyright. During the hearing, the plaintiff's counsel submitted that the Civil Suit had become infructuous.
M/S. Golden Tobie Private Limited v.M/S. Golden Tobacco Limited
M/S. Golden Tobie Private Limited filed a suit seeking permanent injunctions and damages against M/S. Golden Tobacco Limited, alleging wrongful cancellation of an exclusive trademark license agreement. The core dispute revolved around the interpretation and validity of the termination notices issued by the defendant. However, the court ultimately ruled that since the controversy primarily arose from contractual terms rather than statutory infringement, the matter was subject to arbitration as per the existing clause in the agreements.
B4U Television Network India Limited v.Jay Shree Praveen Enterprises And Ors
The Bombay High Court addressed an Interim Application filed by B4U Television Network India Limited concerning the pending Commercial IP Suit. The court noted that some defendants had not yet been served and directed the plaintiff to complete service at the earliest.
Khaitan India Limited v.Khaitar Industries Private Limited & Anr.
The plaintiff filed a suit claiming infringement of its distinctive trade mark 'Khaitan' and passing off against the defendants, who used the similar mark 'Khaitar'. The defendant sought dismissal, arguing that since the defendant also possessed a registered trademark, the suit for infringement was not maintainable. The court ultimately dismissed the interlocutory application seeking dismissal.
Lalit Babbar & anr. v.Remson Prime Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and others
The court heard arguments regarding the jurisdiction of the suit. The plaintif argued that since the relief was an injunction valued at Rs. 130/-, it should be transferred to the District Judge (Central) as the commercial court lacked minimum pecuniary jurisdiction. However, the court found that the dispute related to a trademark ('REMSON PRIME') and thus fell under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Midas Hygiene Industries Private Limited v.Ram Dev Industries And Anr.
Midas Hygiene Industries Private Limited filed a Leave Petition seeking permission from the Bombay High Court to initiate a civil suit against Ram Dev Industries & Anr. The petitioner alleged that the respondents were infringing upon their registered trademarks and engaging in passing off. The court examined the petition, noting the combined cause of action for infringement and passing off. Consequently, the court granted leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent, allowing the petitioner to proceed with the suit.
Kent Ro Systems Ltd And Anr v.Dilip Kumar Shukla & Ors.
In this ongoing commercial suit concerning alleged infringement and passing off related to Kent RO's products, the court addressed a procedural challenge regarding one of the defendants. The defendant argued that the design right relevant to their involvement had expired, prompting the plaintiff to consider removing them from the case. While no final judgment was reached, the court issued several directions for the completion of pleadings and document exchange.
ABP Private Limited & Anr. v.Registrar of Trade Marks, Kolkata & Ors.
The petitioners challenged the Registrar of Trade Marks for allegedly treating several trade mark applications as 'abandoned' without following the prescribed statutory framework under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The court found that the procedure laid down in Section 132 and Rule 38(4) and (5) was not followed, despite the petitioner sending a reply to the objection.
Ms Industries And Spirits P Ltd v.M/S. Allied Blenders And Distillers Pvt ...
This appeal challenged the orders passed by the City Civil Court that granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in a suit concerning alleged trademark and copyright infringement. The plaintiff claimed their 'Officer's Choice' brand was being copied by the defendant's 'Manjeera Classic No.1 Whisky'. However, the Telangana High Court set aside these initial injunction orders, finding that the lower court failed to provide adequate reasons for granting the ex parte relief as mandated by law. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the trial court for a fresh and balanced adjudication.
Ms Industries And Spirits P Ltd v.M/S. Allied Blenders And Distillers Pvt ...
This appeal challenged the grant of ex parte ad interim injunctions by the City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The original suit involved allegations of trademark and copyright infringement (passing off) concerning alcoholic beverages, specifically comparing 'Officer's Choice' with 'Manjeera Classic No.1 Whisky'. However, the Telangana High Court ultimately set aside these injunction orders, finding that the lower court failed to provide reasons for granting the ex parte relief as mandated by law.
Ms Industries And Spirits P Ltd v.M/S. Allied Blenders And Distillers Pvt ...
This appeal challenged the grant of ex parte ad interim injunctions by the City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The original suit involved allegations of trademark and copyright infringement (passing off) concerning alcoholic beverages, specifically comparing 'Officer's Choice' with 'Manjeera Classic No.1 Whisky'. However, the Telangana High Court did not rule on the merits of the IP dispute but instead focused on procedural lapses. The court found that the lower court failed to record reasons for granting the ex parte injunctions as mandated by law, leading to the setting aside and remittance of the orders.
Kamal Kishore Arora v.Central Public Information Officer, Trade Marks Registry
The appellant filed an RTI application seeking detailed particulars of trade mark registration applications that were unlawfully accepted, withdrawn, and the subsequent disciplinary action taken against concerned Examiners. The CPIO initially denied providing certain information citing exemptions under the RTI Act. The Commission found the CPIO's reply misleading regarding complaints received by the organization and directed a revised response.
Japan Tobacco v.D.Jhamnadas
This Delhi High Court order addresses a complex dispute between Japan Tobacco and D.Jhamnadas, involving multiple IP claims. While the defendant relies on their registered trademark 'CAMEL,' the plaintiff asserts claims based on copyright and passing off. The court allowed the suit to proceed despite the pending Supreme Court appeal regarding the trademark registration, directing both parties to file detailed written submissions.
Essdee Industries Through Proprietor Sridhar Velangi v.Esbee Electrotech LLP
This Civil Writ Petition was filed by Essdee Industries against Esbee Electrotech LLP, challenging a previous court order. The impugned order allowed the respondent/plaintiff to conditionally withdraw their composite suit, granting them the liberty to file two separate suits concerning alleged trademark and design infringement of their rights. The Bombay High Court proceeded with issuing notice in this appeal.
The Indian Express (P) Ltd. And 2 Others v.Prashant Goenka And 11 Others
The Bombay High Court addressed a contempt petition alleging breach of an interim order concerning the use of 'INDIAN EXPRESS' trademarks and Ramnath Goenka's copyrighted photographs. After the respondents unconditionally apologized for the inadvertent breaches, the court directed digital platforms (YouTube and Facebook) to remove specified infringing URLs. The primary contempt petition was thus disposed of, while a separate application seeking rejection of the plaint against one defendant was remanded for further hearing.
Narendra Singh v.Ashendra Mishra
Narendra Singh filed an application seeking the appointment of an independent arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, against Ashendra Mishra regarding disputes arising from their partnership firm, M/s. Kautilya Academy. The applicant alleged misuse of the trade mark and siphoning of funds by the respondents. However, the court dismissed the application, holding that since there were serious allegations of forgery, fraud, and dispute over the very execution of the partnership deed, the matter was not fit for arbitration. The proper remedy was directed to be sought in a civil court.
Mr Imran Aman Sharieff (IAS Enterprises) v.M/s Sathwika Traders; M/s Sri Tarakarama Rice Industries
The Karnataka High Court remanded an appeal concerning a dispute over trademark and copyright infringement. The appellant, Mr. Imran Aman Sharieff, sought to overturn the trial court's rejection of his application for a temporary injunction. Crucially, he introduced a new document—an order rejecting the respondents' trade mark registration application—at the appellate stage. The High Court ruled that since this new evidence was not available during the initial proceedings, it could only be used by directing the trial court to reconsider its decision based on the newly produced material.
Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association v.Dijit Kumar, Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., The Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh State Excise Department
The Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association filed a civil suit against several defendants, including Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., alleging infringement and passing off of their trademarked logos such as “UB”, “SNJ”, “KALS”, “APPOLLO”, and “AM”. The plaintiffs sought damages and permanent injunctions to protect the goodwill associated with these marks. However, before the court could proceed further, the plaintiff chose to withdraw the suit.
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s. Murugan Metal Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging infringement and passing off related to their registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and its associated artistic label. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions, destruction of infringing materials, and accounting of profits. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum of compromise.
M/s.Aarumugaa Industries Partnership Firm v.Murugan Metal
M/s.Aarumugaa Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and associated copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions, surrender of infringing stocks, and accounting of profits due to deceptive similarity in branding. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum.
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging multiple infringements, including unauthorized use of the registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and its associated copyrighted artistic label. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions to stop the infringing activities and demanded surrender of stocks and accounts of profits. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum.
M/s.Aarumgaa Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s. Aarumgaa Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal and others, alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and associated copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions to stop the use of similar marks and claims for damages related to passing off. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum of compromise.
Karthikeyan And Company v.M/s.New Brilliant Publications
Karthikeyan And Company filed a civil suit against M/s.New Brilliant Publications alleging both copyright infringement and passing off related to their Tamil notes. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions, surrender of infringing copies, and damages for the unauthorized reproduction and use of their work. However, the plaintiffs subsequently moved the court seeking permission to withdraw the suit due to changes in school syllabus and the defendant discontinuing active business.
N.Sathish Proprietor Om Tech Plastics v.Mr.C.Murali Kannan
N.Sathish filed a suit seeking permanent injunction and damages against Mr.C.Murali Kannan and others, initially alleging passing off related to plastic taps under the mark 'SIVA'. However, the judgment ultimately focused on copyright infringement claims regarding compilations. The court found that the plaintiff himself had copied material from earlier books, leading to the dismissal of the suit.
Ifrs Foundation v.Rammohan Bhave & Ors
The Delhi High Court decreed the suit in favor of IFRS Foundation against Rammohan Bhave & Ors following a comprehensive settlement. The defendants acknowledged the plaintiff's proprietary rights over the 'IFRS' trademark and its copyrighted standards. Key terms included the payment of ₹11 lakhs, the surrender of multiple domain names, the withdrawal of related trademark applications, and an undertaking to cease unauthorized use of the IFRS mark in training materials or goods.
M/s.Radiant Cash Management Services v.All in Pictures
M/s. Radiant Cash Management Services filed a suit against All in Pictures alleging infringement of its exclusive trademark, 'Radiant,' related to the screening of the film 'GORRILA.' The plaintiff sought permanent injunction and damages for the alleged misuse of the mark. However, during the hearing, the defendant submitted an affidavit stating that the matter had been settled out of court.
Intellectual Property Attorneys Association v.The Controller General Of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks & Anr
The petitioner challenged the refusal of trade mark registration applications due to non-speaking orders passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks. The court held that Section 18(5) mandates the Registrar to record and communicate the grounds for refusal in writing. Consequently, Rule 36 of the Trade Marks Rules was deemed arbitrary and inconsistent with the statute.
M/s.Cool Planet (Pvt) Ltd. v.M/s.Cool Planet
This case involved M/s. Cool Planet (Pvt) Ltd. filing a civil suit against various entities, including another entity named M/s. Cool Planet and Paramount Apparels and Exports. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions against the use of the mark 'Cool Planet', alleging infringement of both trade marks and copyright, as well as passing off. Despite the initial claims for damages and delivery up of materials, the parties ultimately reached a settlement.
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.