Year

IP Cases — 1977

7 decisions across all jurisdictions

By jurisdiction: India 7 European UPC 0 US PTAB 0
By type: patent 4 trademark 2 design 1

Page 1 of 1 · 7 total

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 2, 1977

Shantilal Paramshankar Joshi v.Themis Distributors (P.) Limited

Madras High Court · CS. Nos. 67 of 1969 and 167 of 1971; O.S.A. Nos. 53 of 1975 and 51 of 1975; O.S.A. No. 82 of 1976

The plaintiff, a sole proprietor, claimed to be the inventor of a patented 'combined closure and dropper' device. He sued several defendants for infringing this patent. The court found that the plaintiff was the true and first inventor and ruled in favor of the plaintiff regarding infringement claims, while also dismissing appeals related to costs.

patent defendant favorable · Oct 25, 1977

Telerad Private Ltd. v.Jugmug Electric & Radio Co.

Delhi High Court · 13(1977)DLT315

The Delhi High Court upheld the cancellation of the 'Telerad' trademark registered by Jugmug Electric & Radio Co. The court found that despite the goods being in different classes (Class 9 vs Class II), the likelihood of deception and confusion was high because both types of electrical goods were sold through common trade channels, and customers generally associate these products with the same type of manufacturer. This ruling emphasizes that contextual factors, such as shared markets, are critical when assessing trademark conflicts under Section 11(a).

trademark defendant favorable · Aug 22, 1977

Indo-Pharma Pharmaceutical Works v.Pharmaceutical Company Of India

Bombay High Court · null

The plaintiff, proprietor of 'BUTACORTINDON', filed an infringement suit against the defendant, proprietor of 'BUTACORT'. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant's use of BUTACORT constituted infringement. However, the defendants successfully argued that they were prior continuous users and thus entitled to protection under Section 33 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958.

patent defendant favorable · Jul 4, 1977

Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd. v.Controller General Of Patents, Designs ...

Calcutta High Court

The appeal challenged an order passed by the Controller General regarding the settlement of terms for an interim license allowing manufacture of a patented catalyst. The patent covered a specific composition and process for steam reforming catalysts. The Calcutta High Court ultimately declined to interfere with the Controller's order, noting that the patent was nearing expiry.

patent plaintiff favorable · Mar 25, 1977

Raj Parkash v.Mangat Ram Chowdhry And Ors.

Delhi High Court · R.F.A. (CS) 2 of 1973

The plaintiff held a patent for a viewer using a medially cut positive 35mm film. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were infringing this patent by manufacturing and selling identical film strip viewers. Although the initial suit was dismissed, the appeal court upheld the validity of the patent and found infringement.

trademark defendant favorable · Jun 14, 1977

The Imperial Tobacco Co. Of India Ltd. v.The Registrar Of Trade Marks And Anr.

Calcutta High Court · AIR1977CAL413

The Imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. appealed the Registrar's refusal to register its trade mark, which featured 'Simla' and snow-clad hills on cigarette packets. The court examined whether the geographical name could be registered despite being inherently non-distinctive, even with evidence of extensive sales.

design defendant favorable · Dec 22, 1977

K. Gian Chand Jain & Co. v.Girdhari Lal Gupta

Delhi High Court · null

The dispute involved two appeals challenging an order regarding the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court to entertain applications for cancellation of design registrations. The respondents argued that only the Calcutta High Court had exclusive jurisdiction because the register was maintained there. The Full Bench held that any High Court in India could entertain such an application.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Facing a similar IP matter?

Arctic Invent is a specialist IP firm with deep litigation expertise across India, EU, US, and UK. Our team uses data-driven strategy to build stronger cases.

Consult our team →