Trademark Cases

3,667 decisions across India

India 3,667

Page 49 of 123

trademark defendant favorable · Aug 21, 2023

Dolphin Mart Private Limited v.Avenue Supermarts Limited & Anr.

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 177/2017

In this trademark infringement dispute, the Delhi High Court addressed two key applications. First, it permitted the defendants (Avenue Supermarts) to introduce crucial trademark registration certificates into evidence, noting that since these were issued post-filing of the written statement and are in the public domain, they should be admissible. Second, regarding the plaintiff's request for an interim injunction against infringement, the Court dismissed the application, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case or demonstrate that the balance of convenience favored them.
trademark settled · Aug 19, 2023

Saint Gobain Construction Products Uk Limited v.Cyp Rock Industries

Gujarat High Court · C/SCA/13861/2022

Saint Gobain Construction Products UK challenged the registration of 'GYP-ROCK INDUSTRIES' by Cyp Rock Industries, arguing that it was deceptively similar to their established trademark 'GYPROC'. The dispute centered on potential consumer confusion in the market. However, the court accepted the respondent's affidavit, wherein they voluntarily agreed to seek cancellation and cease using the mark. Consequently, the parties were directed to proceed with the voluntary cancellation process before the Trademark Registry.
trademark settled · Aug 18, 2023

Marico Limited v.MW & Sons

Bombay High Court · 901-COMIP(L) 8246.2023

The Commercial IP Suit filed by Marico Limited against MW & Sons regarding alleged trademark infringement was settled between both parties. The Court accepted the Consent Minutes of Order, leading to the disposal and decreeing of the suit in favour of the Plaintiffs.
trademark dismissed · Aug 18, 2023

Adhya Kumar v.Mulligan Concept Teachers Association

Madras High Court · (T)CMA(TM).No.73 of 2023 (OA/14/2018/TM/CH)

The petitioner, Adhya Kumar, filed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking to set aside an earlier order and restore opposition proceedings related to Trademark Application No. 3010257 in Classes 16 and 41. The appeal was ultimately closed after the court noted the prior decision by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 18, 2023

Feroke Boards Limited v.Universal Hardware

Madras High Court · 2023:MHC:3816 (T)OP(TM)/265 to 269/2023

The Madras High Court allowed rectification petitions filed by Feroke Boards Limited against Universal Hardware and the Registrar of Trademarks. The court found that the petitioner had prior use rights for marks like 'FERO' and 'FEROPLY' since 1990, in a near-identical business sector (boards and construction materials). Despite the respondent's attempt to distinguish their composite marks by adding initials ('MK'), the court ruled that this adoption was not honest and was likely to cause consumer confusion. Consequently, the infringing trademark entries were removed from the register.
trademark dismissed · Aug 18, 2023

Produits Petroliers Organisation S.A.S. v.Narendra Kumar Gupta

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.456 of 2023

The Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by Produits Petroliers Organisation S.A.S. seeking the cancellation of the trademark 'KENNOL.' The court noted that the mark had been deemed abandoned because the first respondent failed to file a counter statement in response to the petitioner's opposition notice. Consequently, the original legal challenge became moot.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 18, 2023

M/s.Sree Krishna Pipes v.M/s.Premier PVC Industry

Madras High Court · 2023:MHC:3817

The Madras High Court allowed M/s. Sree Krishna Pipes' petition, directing the removal of a conflicting trademark registration (No. 1120546) held by M/s. Premier PVC Industry. The court found that despite minor spelling differences ('PREMIER' vs 'Preemier'), both marks were used for identical goods—PVC pipes—and their near-identical nature was highly likely to cause confusion and deception among consumers. This ruling reinforces the principle of preventing consumer confusion in trademark law, even when slight variations exist.
trademark defendant favorable · Aug 17, 2023

Venus Worldwide Entertainment Private Limited v.Popular Entertainment Network (Pen) Private Limited & Anr.

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 100/2022

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Plaintiff's application for an interim injunction, which sought to prevent Defendants from releasing a film titled 'Khiladi'. The court found that the Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case and determined that the balance of convenience favored the Defendants. Despite the Plaintiff claiming extensive goodwill and secondary meaning for its trademark 'KHILADI', the Court held that movie titles alone do not warrant an injunction without content similarity, ultimately allowing the disputed film's release.
trademark defendant favorable · Aug 17, 2023

V.Periasamy, Finetech Pipe Products v.V.Shanmugham, S.Sudha; The Deputy Registrar of Trademarks

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.188 of 2023

The Madras High Court dismissed an Original Petition filed by V.Periasamy against V.Shanmugham and the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks. The petitioner sought to cancel a registered trademark (No. 1005460) in Class 17, alleging it was obtained unlawfully. However, due to repeated failure to appear before the court despite proper notice, the petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
trademark mixed · Aug 16, 2023

M/s.Digital Securities Pvt. Ltd. v.The Registrar of Trademarks & M/s.Kwality Ice Creams

Madras High Court · 2023:MHC:3729 (T)CMA(TM)/11/2023

The Madras High Court addressed an appeal challenging an order that allowed the review of a trademark registration application previously treated as abandoned for want of prosecution. The court found that while the original abandonment was based on discretion, the subsequent procedural history and lack of substantive adjudication warranted intervention. Consequently, the Registrar was directed to proceed with the application after granting both the appellant and respondent a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
trademark dismissed · Aug 16, 2023

Mr. Syedmohideen v.Ms.B.SulochanaBai

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.118 of 2023

The Madras High Court addressed the petition filed by Mr. Syedmohideen seeking the cancellation of a registered trademark, IRUTTUKADAI. The petitioner had sought to challenge the registration of this mark held by Ms. B. Sulochana Bai. However, before any substantive hearing took place, the counsel for the petitioner informed the court that he intended to withdraw the petition. Consequently, the High Court dismissed (T)OP(TM).No.118 of 2023 as withdrawn.
trademark defendant favorable · Aug 16, 2023

Abdulla A Olia (Director of M/s Imex Industries (I) Pvt.Ltd.) v.M/s. Shri Ashapura Hardware & The Registrar of Trade Marks

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.56 of 2023

The Madras High Court dismissed the Original Petition filed by Abdulla A Olia seeking rectification or removal of the registered trademark 'STAR IMEX DEVICE' (No. 1625661). The court noted that the petitioner failed to appear at multiple scheduled hearings despite receiving proper notice. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
trademark settled · Aug 14, 2023

Brundaban Sahu v.The Registrar of Trademarks and Suneel Mahanty

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM)/262/2023

The Madras High Court addressed the petition filed by Brundaban Sahu against The Registrar of Trademarks concerning trademark registration no. 1550492. Although the petitioner sought rectification and removal of the entry, counsel informed the court that a settlement had been reached between all parties involved. Consequently, the court dismissed the Original Petition as withdrawn without passing any order regarding costs.
trademark defendant favorable · Aug 14, 2023

M/s.Aquasub Engineering v.M.Mandal Trading as Aqua Tech Enterprises

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.401 of 2023

The Madras High Court disposed of an Original Petition filed by M/s.Aquasub Engineering seeking to rectify or cancel the registration of the trademark AQUATECH (No. 1925332). The court found that the trade mark had lapsed because its last valid registration expired on February 22, 2020, and was not renewed within the statutory period. Consequently, the Court directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to remove the entry from the register.
trademark mixed · Aug 11, 2023

Kent Cables Private Limited & Ors. v.Union Of India Through Its Secretary Department For Promotion Of Industry And Internal Trade & Ors.

Delhi High Court · W.P.(C)-IPD 30/2023

The Delhi High Court addressed a writ petition challenging the advertisement of 'KENT' as a well-known trademark by the Registrar of Trade Marks. The core dispute centered on jurisdictional issues, with the Respondent arguing that such challenges must be filed in the Bombay High Court. However, the Court also clarified procedural requirements for the Registrar, emphasizing that when an applicant relies on court orders to establish well-known status, the Registrar must scrutinize whether those orders constitute a specific declaration or merely preliminary observations.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 11, 2023

Paymate (India) Private Limited v.Paymate Pty Limited; The Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks, The Trade Marks Registry, Chennai

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.469 of 2023

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court disposed of an Original Petition filed by Paymate (India) Private Limited seeking to strike off a specific trademark registration. The court found that Trademark No. 1960699 was no longer in force because its last renewal date had expired on May 5, 2020, and the long stop period for restoration had passed. Consequently, the Court directed the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks to cancel the certificate and remove the entry from the Register.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 11, 2023

M/s. Goldmedal Electricals Pvt Ltd. v.The Registrar of Trade Marks

Madras High Court · (T)CMA(TM)/103/2023

The Madras High Court allowed an appeal filed by M/s. Goldmedal Electricals Pvt Ltd., setting aside an order that had deemed its opposition to a trademark application abandoned. The core issue revolved around whether a communication sent to the Mumbai office, despite being addressed to the Chennai Registry, constituted substantial compliance with the Trade Marks Rules. The court ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that there was sufficient compliance and remanding the matter for fresh consideration on merits.
trademark settled · Aug 11, 2023

M/s.Jaya Balaji Tex v.Senniappan Kuppusamy; The Registrar of Trademarks

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).Nos.99, 100 of 2023

The Madras High Court dismissed two Original Petitions filed under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The petitions sought the removal of specific registered trademarks (No. 1607835 and No. 1464323) from the Register of Trademarks in Class 25. However, both parties reached an amicable resolution regarding the disputes, leading the petitioner to withdraw the cases before the court.
trademark defendant favorable · Aug 11, 2023

Lotte India Corporation Ltd. v.Phan Nguyen Confectionery Corporation; Ajanthaa K.T.K Products

Madras High Court · C.S.No.413 of 2012

The Madras High Court addressed a trademark infringement and passing off suit filed by Lotte India Corporation against Phan Nguyen Confectionery Corporation and Ajanthaa K.T.K Products regarding the 'CHOCO PIE' mark. Despite the plaintiff alleging identical use of the mark, the court found that the plaintiff failed to adequately prove the infringement by the defendants. Consequently, the suit was largely dismissed on the core claims of trademark violation and damages.
trademark mixed · Aug 11, 2023

Home Box Office, Inc. v.Danish Salim; The Registrar of Trademarks

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.352 of 2023

In this matter concerning trademark cancellation, Home Box Office challenged an entry in the Register of Trademarks. However, the court noted that the registered proprietor of the impugned mark had subsequently agreed to cancel the registration. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the Original Petition by directing the Registrar of Trademarks to complete the necessary steps for cancellation and removal of the entry within a specified timeframe.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 11, 2023

Pfizer Products Inc. v.R. Hanumantha Rao

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.149 of 2023

Pfizer Products Inc. successfully petitioned the Madras High Court to expunge the registration of the trademark VECOREX (No. 980006) from the register. The court noted that the mark had not been renewed since December 29, 2020. Consequently, the court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to remove the entry within four weeks, effectively clearing the mark for potential use by the petitioner.
trademark mixed · Aug 10, 2023

R.Subbulakshmi (Deceased) & others v.1/183 & others

Madras High Court · O.P.No.40 of 2019, etc., batch

This case involved complex disputes among the partners and legal heirs of a newspaper publishing firm, Dinamalar. The core issue revolved around the status and ownership of the firm's trademark following its dissolution. The Madras High Court addressed several related civil suits and original applications concerning partnership rights and intellectual property.
trademark settled · Aug 10, 2023

Mankind Pharma Limited v.Trivigya Bioscience

Gujarat High Court · C/RA/43/2022

In a trademark dispute concerning the 'KIND' family of marks, Mankind Pharma Limited successfully secured an undertaking from Trivigya Bioscience. The respondent acknowledged the propriety of Mankind's marks and voluntarily agreed to cease using the contested mark CDKIND in relation to pharmaceutical preparations. Consequently, the rectification application was disposed of as not pressed, resolving the conflict amicably.
trademark settled · Aug 10, 2023

B.M.Dhananjaya.S v.M/s.Billionsmiles Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.26 of 2023

The Madras High Court dismissed Original Petition (Trademarks) No. 26 of 2023 after the petitioner, B.M.Dhananjaya.S, filed a request to withdraw the case. The original petition sought the expungement and removal of an entry related to the registered trademark 1485593 from the Trademark Registry. The withdrawal was based on a settlement reached between the contesting parties, concluding the dispute without a formal judicial ruling on the merits.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 10, 2023

Foodvista India Pvt. Ltd. v.The Registrar of Trademarks

Madras High Court · (T)CMA(TM).Nos.79, 155 of 2023 (OA/6, 7/2020/TM/CH)

The Madras High Court intervened in trademark applications filed by Foodvista India Pvt. Ltd., which were previously refused by the Trademark Registry on grounds of descriptiveness. The court found that the refusal orders were unreasoned and failed to consider the appellant's evidence of use and acquired distinctiveness, particularly under the proviso to Section 9(1) of the Trademarks Act. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the Registrar for reconsideration, mandating a reasoned decision based on all submitted evidence.
trademark plaintiff favorable · Aug 10, 2023

Mankind Pharma Limited v.Genova Biotechniques Pvt. Ltd.

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM).No.258 of 2023

Mankind Pharma Limited successfully petitioned the Madras High Court to remove a specific trademark, 'PSO KIND,' from the register. The court observed that while the mark was initially registered, its renewal had lapsed after November 8, 2020. Consequently, the time limit for both renewal and restoration had expired. The court directed the Registrar of Trademarks to cancel the registration certificate and remove the entry within four weeks.
trademark mixed · Aug 7, 2023

Roxtec Ab & Anr v.Sukant Chakravarty & Ors

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 1045/2016 and CS(COMM) 1046/2016

The Delhi High Court addressed an application filed by Roxtec Ab & Anr seeking permission to file rectification petitions against registered trademarks, which the defendants argued were monopolizing common industry terms. The court examined the claims related to a 'Bulls Eye' device mark and the slogan 'We Seal Your World'. While addressing the scope of trademark rights, the Court ultimately disposed of the application but framed an issue regarding whether Roxtec India Private Limited (Plaintiff No. 2) was a necessary party in the ongoing suit.
trademark settled · Aug 7, 2023

Pioneer Bakeries (P) Ltd. v.New Hope Food Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Madras High Court · (T)OP(TM)/120/2023, (T)OP(TM)/123/2023 & (T)OP(TM)/126/2023

The Madras High Court disposed of multiple Original Petitions filed by Pioneer Bakeries (P) Ltd seeking cancellation of several trademarks. The court noted that both parties had reached a comprehensive Settlement Agreement dated March 26, 2018. This agreement defined specific usage rights for the 'MILKA' mark in Class 30, ensuring mutual non-infringement across various product categories. Consequently, the petitions were disposed of based on this existing compromise, avoiding a full judicial hearing.
trademark mixed · Aug 4, 2023

V. R. Holdings v.Hero Investocorp Limited & Anr.

Delhi High Court · LPA 397/2023

This appeal before the Delhi High Court questioned the correctness of a single judge's decision that dismissed an appellant's petition for rectification under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act. The core legal debate centered on whether the Letters Patent Appeal was maintainable, particularly in light of restrictions imposed by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Given the serious dispute and potential impact on pending cancellation proceedings, the Court granted an interim stay on the impugned judgment to balance the interests of both parties.
trademark defendant favorable · Aug 4, 2023

M/S. Tradall S.A. v.The Learned Registrar of Trade Marks

Madras High Court · (T)CMA(TM)/38/2023

The Madras High Court dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by M/S. Tradall S.A. against the Learned Registrar of Trade Marks. The appellant had sought to revoke a previous refusal order and allow the registration of the mark 'HALLMARK' in Class 33. However, due to repeated non-appearance of the appellant's counsel during scheduled hearings, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of prosecution.
1 •••484950•••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 →