IP Cases — 2008
83 decisions across all jurisdictions
Page 1 of 3 · 83 total
F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. v.Cipla Limited
This case involves F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. seeking an ad-interim injunction against Cipla Limited for allegedly infringing its patent on the cancer drug Erlotinib (marketed as Tarceva). The court examined the balance between protecting the innovator's intellectual property rights and ensuring public access to a life-saving generic medication. Ultimately, the court dismissed the request for an immediate injunction, prioritizing the public interest in patient access.
M/S International Film Distributors v.Shri Rishi Raj
This appeal addressed a dispute over the distribution rights of the cinematographic film 'Kohinoor'. The plaintiff had acquired extensive negative and video rights from the Official Assignee. However, the defendant asserted pre-existing theatrical rights for specific overseas territories dating back to 1961. The court found that while the plaintiff's rights were confirmed on an 'as is where is' basis, they were not absolute or exclusive. Consequently, the interim order was modified to allow the defendant limited commercial exploitation in their contracted regions, while maintaining protection for the plaintiff in India and other excluded territories.
Natco Pharma Limited v.Union Of India & Ors.
The Supreme Court addressed an appeal concerning patentability issues involving crystal modification of an N-Phenyl-2-Pyrimidineamine derivative. The core issue was the absence of a qualified Technical Member in the Intellectual Property Appellant Board (IPAB).
M/s.Orchid Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Limited v.M/s.United Biotech Pvt. Ltd.
Orchid Chemicals filed appeals challenging the dismissal of its application for interim injunction against United Biotech, which was marketing a product under the mark 'FORZID' in Tamil Nadu. The court examined claims of trade mark infringement and passing off regarding the pharmaceutical preparation ORZID.
ADC GmbH v.Kartik Telecomptrols (Pvt.) Ltd.
The plaintiffs, including ADC GmbH and Krone Communication Ltd., filed a suit for permanent injunction against Kartik Telecomptrols (Pvt.) Ltd. alleging that the defendant was manufacturing and selling junction box casings identical to those protected by Indian Patent No.164857. The court found the defendant guilty of infringement.
Beiersdorf A.G. v.Ajay Sukhwani & Another
Beiersdorf A.G. successfully sued Ajay Sukhwani & Another for passing off, asserting its rights over the well-known trademark NIVEA. The Delhi High Court found that the defendants' initial adoption of the mark was dishonest, thereby rejecting their pleas of delay and laches. Consequently, the court granted a permanent injunction, protecting Beiersdorf's brand integrity against unauthorized use by the defendants.
Mr.Muthukumar; Mrs.Padmavathi; M/s.Alama International v.M/s.Aloha India (A Division of K.K.Academy (P) Ltd); Mrs.J.V.Vasantha Laxmi
The petitioners challenged an order passed by the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, which had granted an ad-interim injunction favoring the first respondent. The respondents argued that since the suit involved matters relating to Trade Marks Act, 1999, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the trial court and constituted an abuse of process. The High Court agreed, holding that the relief sought under the Trade Marks Act must be initiated in the High Court itself.
Cadila Healthcare Limited v.Dabur India Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed Cadila Healthcare Limited's request for an interim injunction against Dabur India Limited, finding that the use of 'Sugar Free' by the defendant did not constitute passing off. The court held that the expression was used purely descriptively to indicate a product attribute (no added sugar), rather than as a trademark intended to mislead consumers into believing a connection with Cadila’s goodwill. Consequently, the plaintiff failed to establish the necessary elements of misrepresentation required for a passing-off claim.
The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v.Sanjay Dalia & Anr.
This Delhi High Court judgment addresses a dispute over the proper forum for filing a copyright infringement suit. The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. challenged the court's order directing them to refile their plaint in Maharashtra, arguing that its presence in Delhi granted it sufficient territorial sway under Section 62 of the Copyright Act. However, the court ultimately held that while Section 62 provides an additional forum, a pragmatic interpretation requires the suit to be filed where the cause of action actually arose.
Astor Technologies v.L.B.Thiagarajan
Astor Technologies appealed a single judge's order that dismissed their application for an interim injunction against L.B.Thiagarajan regarding alleged infringement of copyright in the 'ASTOR EAZY DESIGN' software. The appellants argued they were the owners and the respondent illegally took the source code, while the court found it premature to grant an injunction without a full trial.
Mr.Kiran Jogani & Anr. v.George V.Records, Sarl
The Delhi High Court upheld the grant of an interim injunction in a trademark dispute concerning the mark BUDDHA-BAR. The respondent, George V.Records, Sarl, successfully argued that the mark had acquired trans-border reputation and was being infringed upon by the appellants/defendants who adopted an identical name for music albums. Despite the defendants raising several defenses regarding prior use and lack of evidence, the court found sufficient prima facie material to protect the respondent's goodwill until the final trial.
Ravi Kamal Bali v.Kala Tech And Ors.
The Plaintiff sought an injunction against the Defendants for manufacturing and selling tamper-proof locks/seals that allegedly infringed his patents. The court examined the infringement claims, noting the similarity between the parties' products. However, the court ultimately denied the injunction due to the Plaintiff's significant delay in bringing the matter before the court.
Mariappan v.A.R.Safiullah
This Madras High Court judgment addressed appeals concerning alleged infringement and passing off related to food-grade laminated paper resembling banana leaves. The plaintiff, Mariappan, claimed exclusive rights under Patent No. 198079 and a registered design. The court sustained the interim injunction favoring Mariappan, recognizing his established goodwill and potential irreparable loss. However, it noted that the concept was prima facie innovative rather than an invention, confirming the earlier order against A.R.Safiullah.
Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited v.Hindustan Unilever Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's request for an interim injunction, finding that the defendant's advertisement did not disparage the plaintiff's product. The court used a Venn diagram analogy to demonstrate that the plaintiff’s thick cleaner does not fall into the category of thin and blue cleaners targeted by the ad. This ruling reinforces the principle that comparative advertising is permissible as long as it does not directly denigrate another trader's specific goods.
Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v.Mr. Wang Zhi Zhu Ce Yong Hu & Others
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Super Cassettes Industries Ltd., granting a permanent injunction against the defendants for using the deceptively similar domain name SUPERCASSETTES.COM. The court found that the registration of this domain name, which was created long after the plaintiff had established its brand identity, constituted an attempt to pass off their business and damage the plaintiff's goodwill. Furthermore, given the detrimental nature of the website's content (adult/pornographic), the court also awarded damages and directed the transfer of the domain name to the plaintiff.
Bajaj Auto Ltd. v.Tvs Motor Company Ltd.
Bajaj Auto Ltd. sought an interim injunction against TVS Motor Company Ltd., alleging that its 125-CC 'FLAME' motorcycle infringed upon Bajaj's Patent No. 195904, which covers an improved four-stroke internal combustion engine using twin spark plugs. The court examined the prima facie case, finding that novelty and enablement had been established by the applicant through market presence. Consequently, the interim injunction was granted in favor of Bajaj Auto Ltd., restraining further infringement.
Cable News Network Lp, Lllp (Cnn) v.Cam News Network Limited
The Delhi High Court granted interim relief to CNN, finding a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off against Cam News Network Limited. The court noted that CNN is the prior user and registered proprietor of the 'CNN' mark, which has acquired significant goodwill globally. Given the similarity in the news industry, the use of 'CNN' by the defendant on its magazine cover was deemed likely to cause confusion among the public, tipping the balance of convenience in favor of CNN.
All India Patent Officers Welfare Association v.Union Of India & Ors
The All India Patent Officers Welfare Association filed a petition alleging that the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) unlawfully provided access to sensitive, unpublished trademark and patent application data to a private multinational company. The petitioner argued this access lacked necessary checks and balances. The Delhi High Court accepted the petition and directed an investigation into the matter, setting a timeline for the respondents to file their reply.
Larsen And Toubro Ltd. v.Lachmi Narain Trades And Ors
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Larsen And Toubro Ltd., granting a permanent injunction against the defendants for passing off. The court found that L&T's name and abbreviation, having acquired distinctiveness over decades, were being used by the defendants (using marks like 'LNT'/'ELENTE') to sell electrical goods, thereby causing confusion among the public. This judgment reinforces the principle of protecting established goodwill and reputation against deceptive trade practices.
M/S Kirorimal Kashiram Marketing And Agencies Private Limited v.M/S Sachdeva & Sons Industries Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of the plaintiff, M/S Kirorimal Kashiram Marketing And Agencies Private Limited, against M/S Sachdeva & Sons Industries Pvt. Ltd. The dispute centered on alleged infringement and passing off concerning rice products using similar trade marks ('Double Deer' vs 'Deer'). The court ruled that despite differences in artistic features or geographical scope, the similarity of the core mark and the nature of the goods (rice) create a high risk of consumer confusion, thus warranting immediate restraint.
Falcon Tyres Limited v.TVS Srichakara Tyres Limited
Falcon Tyres Limited appealed against an absolute ad-interim injunction granted by the single judge, which restrained them from selling tyres with tread patterns similar to Falcon's Dragon tyre. The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the designs of the two tyres were conspicuously different and that the single judge had improperly considered passing off instead of design infringement.
Span Diagnostic v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And ...
The dispute involved an appeal filed by Span Diagnostic challenging a decision made by the Controller of Patents concerning a patent opposition. The core legal question was whether the appeals were maintainable in the High Court or required transfer to the Appellate Board, given subsequent amendments and notifications.
Toyotomi Co. Ltd. v.Alfa Therm Ltd.
The plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction against the defendant for infringing their copyright in engineering drawings and manuals related to the KSA-120/OMNI 230 Type - E kerosene heater, and for passing off the defendant's goods as theirs. The court dismissed the application for interim injunction, finding no prima facie case of infringement or passing off.
Department Of Income Tax v.Solid Works Corporation, Mumbai
The appeal was filed by the Department of Income Tax, arguing that payments received by Solid Works Corporation for its shrink-wrap software constituted royalty under the Indo-US DTAA. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the payment was merely for the purchase of a copyrighted article and not a right to use copyright.
M/s.World Wide Brands Inc. v.Smt.Dayavanti Jhamnadas Hinduja, Smt.Janaki Madanlal Hinduja, Smt.Veena Rajendra Hinduja, Smt.Nalini Dinesh Hinduja (Trading as The Central Wearhouse) and The Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks
M/s.World Wide Brands Inc challenged the Intellectual Property Appellate Board's order allowing the registration of 'Camel Collection' by local partners trading as The Central Wearhouse. The petitioner argued that their global reputation and prior use entitled them to exclusive rights, while the respondents claimed long-standing continuous use in India since 1992. The Madras High Court upheld the appellate board's finding that the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence of commercial publicity within India.
Shri Pankaj Goel v.M/S. Dabur India Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed Shri Pankaj Goel's appeal against an ex-parte injunction granted to Dabur India Ltd. The court found that despite arguments regarding prior use and commonality of the suffix 'MOLA,' the Respondent's registered mark, HAJMOLA, was distinctive and well-known. Furthermore, the court rejected the defense of laches or acquiescence, noting that passing off is a recurring cause of action and delay would not apply if the defendant's conduct was fraudulent.
Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited v.Cipla Limited
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction favoring Sun Pharmaceuticals against Cipla regarding the use of the trademark THEOBID-D. Despite arguments from the defendant citing statutory requirements for registered assignment, the court found that the plaintiff was entitled to protection based on prima facie rights and the potential irreparable injury caused by continued infringement in the pharmaceutical sector. The order restrained the defendant's associates from using the disputed mark during the pendency of the suit.
Garware - Wall Ropes Ltd. v.M/s. A.I. Chopra, Engineers & Contractors
Garware - Wall Ropes Ltd. filed a suit claiming infringement of its patents (GSWR and Spiral Lock Systems) by M/s. A.I. Chopra. The appeal challenged the rejection of the temporary injunction application. The court allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order, and issued a temporary injunction against the respondent.
Amit R. Trivedi Trading As Active Health v.Assistant Registrar Of Trade Marks And ...
The appellant, a pharmaceutical manufacturer, appealed against the Assistant Registrar's refusal to register the trade mark SEREN. The appeal argued that since the product was a prescription drug, there was no likelihood of confusion. However, the IPAB found the marks (SEREN and SERENE) to be patently identical phonetically and structurally, concluding that the likelihood of deception was imminent.
Hardev Singh Akoi v.Jasdev Singh Akoi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Hardev Singh Akoi regarding the trademarks associated with 'THE IMPERIAL' Hotel. The court found that since both parties were joint owners of the word mark and the lion device logo, unilateral changes or unauthorized use by one owner (the first defendant) could injure the rights of the other. Specifically, the defendants were restrained from altering the original lion device logo to include an elephant motif or using deceptively similar marks without the plaintiff's consent.
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.