Trademark Cases

3,667 decisions across India

India 3,667

Page 24 of 123

trademark interim order · Sep 30, 2024

Shankar Engineering Works And Ors v.Sankar Iron Engineering Works Pvt Ltd And Ors.

Calcutta High Court · IP-COM/34/2024

The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking perpetual injunction against the defendants concerning an alleged mark used by the defendants for identical products. The plaintiffs argued that there was urgency and sufficient cause to bypass the pre-mediation process.
trademark interim order · Sep 30, 2024

Unique Entrepreneurs And Finance Limited v.Really Agritech Pvt. Ltd.

Calcutta High Court · IP-COM/31/2024

The plaintiff filed a suit alleging that the defendant is using the deceptively similar trademark 'REALLY' against the plaintiff's registered mark 'RALLI', leading to infringement and passing off. The court granted various leaves sought by the plaintiff, including leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent and Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, allowing the suit to proceed.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 30, 2024

The Hershey Company v.Ashok Kumar & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 836/2024

The Hershey Company successfully sought the expansion of its existing interim injunction against new parties found to be engaging in trademark infringement. The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff to implead several new defendants and extended the protective order, specifically restraining them from using or reproducing the company's name and marks on domains like THEHERSHEYCOMPANY.IN. This ruling reinforces the court's willingness to expand injunctive relief when evidence reveals additional infringing parties.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 27, 2024

Ashok Bhutani v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · W.P.(C)-IPD 22/2024

Ashok Bhutani successfully challenged the Trademark Registry in the Delhi High Court regarding the non-renewal of his word mark 'SNOWPEAK'. The petitioner argued that the failure to receive mandatory O-3 notices prevented him from filing timely renewal applications. Recognizing the registry's lapse, the court directed the respondents to issue all pending renewal certificates and subsequently restore and renew the trademarks for a further ten-year period.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 26, 2024

Jai Prakash Singhal v.Tirupati Structurals Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · FAO(OS) (COMM) 126/2024, CM APPL. 36619/2024

The Delhi High Court upheld an injunction restraining Tirupati Structurals Limited (the defendant) from using the trademark 'MM TIRUPATI' due to its deceptive similarity to the plaintiff's registered mark, 'TSL-TIRUPATI'. The court clarified that even if a portion of a trademark is subject to a disclaimer, the overall composite mark can still be protected against passing off. This ruling reinforces the principle that established goodwill and consumer confusion are paramount in protecting brand identity.
trademark mixed · Sep 25, 2024

Max Healthcare Institute Limited v.Imax Healthcare Private Limited & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · FAO (COMM) 117/2024, CM APPL. 34386/2024(Stay)

The Delhi High Court addressed an appeal challenging a lower court's rejection of a temporary injunction sought by Max Healthcare Institute Limited against Imax Healthcare Private Limited. The core dispute centered on the alleged deceptive similarity between Max's well-known 'MAX' trademark, used extensively in healthcare services since 2000, and the respondent's use of 'IMAX'. While acknowledging the strong prima facie case for confusion, the High Court ultimately allowed the appeal, directing the matter back to the District Judge for a fresh hearing on the injunction application.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 24, 2024

Kx Technologies Llc v.The Registrar of Trade Marks

Madras High Court · CMA(TM)/6/2024

The Madras High Court set aside the Registrar of Trade Marks' decision that rejected Kx Technologies Llc's word mark application 'FACT'. The court found that while there were conflicting marks owned by Fertilisers & Chemicals Travancore Limited, the scope of protection for those earlier marks was limited to fertilizer and chemical products. Since Kx intended to use 'FACT' exclusively for air and water purification filters, the risk of confusion was deemed unlikely, allowing the application to proceed with a specific disclaimer.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 20, 2024

Dcm Shriram Limited v.Kohinoor Seed Fields India Private Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 819/2024

Dcm Shriram Limited successfully secured an interim injunction against Kohinoor Seed Fields India Private Limited in the Delhi High Court. The court recognized a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off, given Dcm Shriram's established brand presence and statutory protection for its 'Shriram Super 303' mark. This crucial order temporarily prevents the defendant from using deceptively similar marks like '303' in relation to wheat seeds, protecting the plaintiff's market reputation during the critical Rabi cropping season.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 19, 2024

Kiehberg Gmbh And Anr v.Capital Airgun Manufacturers Private Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 808/2024

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Kiehberg GmbH against Capital Airgun Manufacturers Private Limited. The plaintiffs successfully demonstrated a prima facie case of passing off, arguing that the defendant's use of the identical trademark 'KIEHBERG' for airguns was likely to cause confusion and damage their established goodwill. This crucial order temporarily prevents the defendant from using the disputed mark until the full trial.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 19, 2024

Verizon Trademark Services Llc & Ors. v.Dr. Neeraj Yadav & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 805/2024

The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of Verizon Trademark Services LLC against Dr. Neeraj Yadav & Anr., finding a prima facie case for trademark infringement and passing off. The court restrained the defendants from using deceptively similar marks like 'VERIEZON' across their hospital, pharmacy, and domain name. This crucial interim order protects Verizon's brand while allowing the parties time to contest the claims.
trademark settled · Sep 19, 2024

Jumeirah Beach Resort Llc v.Designarch Consultants Private Ltd

Delhi High Court · FAO(OS)(COMM) 144/2021 & CM APPL. 40965/2021 (and related appeals)

This Delhi High Court judgment resolves a complex trademark dispute between Jumeirah Beach Resort LLC and Designarch Consultants Private Ltd through a comprehensive settlement. The parties mutually agreed to acknowledge each other's core trademarks, such as 'BURJ AL ARAB' and 'BURJNOIDA'. Crucially, the agreement mandates the withdrawal of numerous pending cancellation petitions and oppositions filed by both sides, effectively clearing the path for continued use while establishing clear boundaries on brand usage.
trademark mixed · Sep 19, 2024

Leayan Global Private Limited v.Comfort X India & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 418/2022, I.A. 4844/2022-Stay, I.A. 4845/2022-Summoning of record pertaining to impugned trademark

The Delhi High Court issued an order in the trademark dispute between Leayan Global Private Limited and Comfort X India & Anr., granting a request for adjournment. While arguments were pending regarding the distinctiveness of competing trademarks like 'COMFORT WALK,' the court allowed the petitioner to present additional documents despite their recent filing. The hearing was re-notified for December 17, 2024, contingent upon Leayan Global depositing costs.
trademark mixed · Sep 18, 2024

Modern Mold Plast Pvt. Ltd. v.Flipkart Internet Pt. Ltd.

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 803/2024

This Delhi High Court judgment addressed a suit filed by Modern Mold Plast Pvt. Ltd. against Flipkart Internet Pt. Ltd., alleging trademark infringement, passing off, and copyright violation related to their 'MAHARAJA' brand. The core issue was unauthorized sellers latching onto the plaintiffs' product listings on the e-commerce platform, using the plaintiff's trademark in invoices. While the suit was ultimately disposed of without a final judgment on damages, the Court issued critical mandatory directions compelling Flipkart to actively prevent this practice and immediately disable the 'latching-on' feature upon notification from the plaintiffs.
trademark mixed · Sep 18, 2024

Chattisgarh Distilleries Limited v.Great Galleon Ventures Ltd & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 10/2023 & CRL.M.A.13366/2024, I.A. 20163/2023, I.A. 2428/2024

The Delhi High Court issued a procedural order in the dispute between Chattisgarh Distilleries Limited and Great Galleon Ventures Ltd. The court directed the impleadment of the Registrar of Trademarks and ordered various parties to file amended memos, additional affidavits, and formal responses regarding original registration documents presented by the petitioner. This indicates the case is progressing through a detailed evidentiary phase.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 17, 2024

Koteshwar Chemfood Industries Pvt. Ltd. v.Sachdeva And Sons Industres Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi High Court · C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 375/2021

The Delhi High Court granted rectification in favor of the petitioner, Koteshwar Chemfood Industries Pvt. Ltd., regarding the disputed trademark 'PRIME'. The court found that the respondent's registration for 'PRIME' should be limited to rice and allied goods, specifically deleting salt and spices from its scope. This decision was based on the petitioner's long-standing use of the mark in Class 30 (iodized salt) since 1995, establishing prior goodwill and preventing consumer confusion.
trademark mixed · Sep 17, 2024

Rahul Kapoor Trading As Royal Field And Co. v.Naresh Kumar Trading As Ms Nutan Malleables

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 186/2024

The Delhi High Court addressed procedural applications in a trademark rectification case concerning the mark 'ROYAL'. While granting an exemption from filing certified copies, the court also accepted the application for condonation of 143 days of delay. The core petition seeks to rectify the trademark 'ROYAL' based on the discovery of a competing registered mark owned by the respondent, arguing likelihood of confusion among consumers.
trademark mixed · Sep 17, 2024

Mankind Pharma Limited v.Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 799/2024

In a trademark infringement suit, Mankind Pharma Limited sought an injunction against Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited regarding the use of the mark 'TOFASTAR' versus 'TOBASTAR'. The court allowed the plaintiff's request for exemption from pre-litigation mediation due to the urgency of the matter. Furthermore, both parties indicated a willingness to settle the dispute at the earliest opportunity, leading the court to renotify the case for further proceedings.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 13, 2024

M/S. Sri Laxmi Balaji Industries v.M/S. Lakshmi Venkateshwar Saroja Hangaraki Rice Industries

Karnataka High Court · WP No. 77807 of 2013 (NC: 2024:KHC-D:13121)

The Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition filed by M/S. Sri Laxmi Balaji Industries, quashing an earlier order that had dismissed their application for staying civil suit proceedings. The petitioners sought to halt the ongoing litigation (O.S.No.3/2012) while their trademark rectification application was pending before the Madras High Court. The court ruled that Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act mandates a stay on civil proceedings when a rectification application is pending, thereby granting relief and directing the petitioners to expedite the process.
trademark settled · Sep 12, 2024

M/S Khubsons Electronics Llp Through Its Partner Mr. Bharat Khubchandani v.Mr. Gautam Puniani Trading As Yk Enterprises

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 568/2024

In a case concerning trademark infringement, the Delhi High Court formalized an amicable settlement between M/S Khubsons Electronics Llp (Plaintiff) and Mr. Gautam Puniani Trading As Yk Enterprises (Defendant). The parties agreed that the Defendant infringed upon the Plaintiff's well-known trademarks (TAKAI / HAK), acknowledged their rights, and committed to ceasing all use of similar marks. The court decreed the suit based on these terms, which included the cancellation of the infringing trademark and a payment of liquidated damages.
trademark mixed · Sep 12, 2024

Aachi Spices and Condiments Private Limited (and others) v.Aachiamman Chit Funds Private Limited

Madras High Court · O.S.A (CAD) No.73 of 2021

This appeal before the Madras High Court Commercial Appellate Division challenged a summary judgment that dismissed a suit for trademark infringement. The plaintiffs, owners of registered trademarks related to 'AACHI', argued that the judgment was flawed because it was rendered without hearing their arguments. The court found that the impugned judgment proceeded solely on perusal of the plaint and failed to consider the plaintiffs' submissions. Consequently, the High Court set aside the summary judgment and remanded the matter back to the Commercial Division for a fresh legal drill.
trademark mixed · Sep 12, 2024

Sanjeev Gupta v.Aman Gupta Trading As M/S Delhi Electricals Trading Company & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 177/2024, CS(COMM) 786/2024

The Delhi High Court addressed multiple petitions concerning trademark disputes between family members. The cases involved rectification requests challenging the registration of marks like 'USHA' and a suit seeking injunction against alleged infringement using the mark 'ANUSHA'. Given the familial nature of the dispute, the court opted not to proceed with immediate litigation. Instead, the parties were referred to Pre-Institution Mediation to explore an amicable resolution. This order highlights the judiciary's preference for alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in complex family IP disputes.
trademark mixed · Sep 11, 2024

Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd. v.Mumtaz Ahmed & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 176/2024

The Delhi High Court addressed an application filed by Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd. seeking the removal or rectification of the registered trademark 'GMW' (No. 1978669) from the Register, alleging that it is deceptively and confusingly similar to their own mark. The court accepted notice and directed that respondent no. 1 be served with notice, allowing them four weeks to file a reply. This order sets the stage for further litigation on trademark infringement and rectification grounds.
trademark mixed · Sep 11, 2024

Manish Kumar Jain & Another v.Tushar Saraf & Ors.

Calcutta High Court · APOT No. 316 of 2024 / IP-Com No. 21 of 2024

The Calcutta High Court addressed an appeal challenging a prior interim trademark injunction. The court found that while the initial stay was granted based on prima facie evidence, further material had become available to both parties. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, but the original interim order restraining the appellants from using the marks 'JJ DELUX' and related forms was extended until September 20, 2024, allowing for a comprehensive review by the trial judge.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 10, 2024

Paragon Cable India & Anr. v.Essee Networks Private Limited & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 112/2023, I.A. 4176/2023

The Delhi High Court decreed the suit filed by Paragon Cable India against Essee Networks Private Limited, upholding a settlement agreement reached between the parties. The core dispute involved the infringement and passing off related to the trademark 'ELEKTRON'. Crucially, the court directed the Trademark Registry to expeditiously transfer the rights of the 'ELEKTRON' mark into the name of the plaintiffs, formalizing the assignment made by the defendants.
trademark mixed · Sep 10, 2024

Havells India Limited & Anr. v.Havai Home Products Pvt. Ltd. & Ors

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 778/2024

The Delhi High Court has initiated proceedings in the suit concerning the alleged infringement of the 'HAVELLS' trademark. The court allowed several procedural applications filed by Havells India Limited, granting exemptions from pre-litigation mediation and advance service upon the defendants. Furthermore, the court registered the plaint seeking permanent injunctions for trademark infringement, passing off, and copyright violation, while also addressing an application for interim relief based on the plaintiff's well-known mark status.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 9, 2024

Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd & Anr. v.Terre Primitive & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 768/2024

The Delhi High Court addressed a trademark infringement suit filed by the Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation (AMUL) against Terre Primitive. The court found that the defendant's use of 'Amuleti' was identical and deceptively similar to AMUL's well-known mark, leading to potential consumer confusion. Consequently, the court granted interim relief, directing the defendant to cease using the infringing marks, take down products from their website, surrender materials for destruction, and block specific social media URLs.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 9, 2024

Louis Vuitton Malletier v.Ashok Kumar & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 769/2024

The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim ex parte injunction in favor of Louis Vuitton Malletier against the defendants. The court found that the plaintiff, a well-known luxury brand, had made out a prima facie case for infringement of its registered trademark 'LV' and associated copyrights. This interim order immediately restrains the defendants from manufacturing or selling products featuring marks identical or deceptively similar to LV, pending further proceedings.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 9, 2024

Headout Inc. v.Ashok Kumar / John Doe And Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 726/2024

Headout Inc. successfully secured an interim injunction against the defendants in the Delhi High Court, addressing claims of trademark infringement and passing off. The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the use of confusingly similar marks related to travel services. Furthermore, specific mandatory directions were issued compelling the defendants to immediately take down, block, and suspend all infringing websites, domain names, and social media profiles.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 6, 2024

SRMB Srijan Private Limited v.Grihashakti Private Limited

Calcutta High Court · AP-COM/808/2024

The Calcutta High Court granted a temporary injunction in favor of SRMB Srijan Private Limited against Grihashakti Private Limited. The court found that the respondent was grossly violating the terms of a franchise agreement by misusing the petitioner's 'SRMB' trademark and brand, logo, and trade dress while manufacturing TMT Steel Bars without adhering to required standards. Given the urgency and apprehension of further misuse, the court restrained the respondent from using the marks or selling related products until November 30, 2024.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Sep 5, 2024

Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt Ltd v.Shree Shubh Rathnam Associates And Ors

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 226/2023

In an amicable settlement reached before the Delhi High Court, Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt Ltd secured a decree against Shree Shubh Rathnam Associates. The parties agreed that the defendants would transition their seven existing 'Sagar Express' outlets into franchisees under Sagar Ratna's brand. Crucially, the defendants committed to surrendering the 'Sagar Express' trademark and agreeing not to use any similar names in the future, effectively resolving long-standing trademark infringement disputes.
1 •••232425•••123
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 →