Delhi High Court
LEGAL SUBJECT
Intellectual Property Law
Judgment analyses where this is the main or secondary subject.Latest analyses
30 ARTICLES
Supreme Court
Larger Bench to decide whether Civil Judges can hear trademark suits despite Section 134’s District Court requirement
The appeal concerned the maintainability and proper forum of a suit under Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 in the State of Jharkhand, where a Civil Judge (Senior Division) had been notified as a Commercial Cou...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
A thermally conductive wrapper’s claimed flame-barrier function cannot be inferred from conductivity alone.
Philip Morris Products S.A. was granted Indian Patent No. 384250 on 14 December 2021 for an invention titled “Heated Aerosol Generating Article with Thermal Spreading Wrap”, relating to a heated aerosol-generating art...5 MIN READ↗
Calcutta High Court
Registered trademark is not a shield against passing-off claims or interim injunctions, Calcutta High Court holds in ITC Gold Flake case
ITC Limited instituted a commercial suit seeking injunction against Pravin Kumar and other defendants for alleged infringement and passing off of its “Gold Flake” cigarette trade marks, trade dress and copyright throu...5 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Advertisement under Section 20 follows acceptance; courts cannot direct publication before the Registrar accepts the application.
The appellant applied for registration of the trademark “OFFER” in Class 33 for “alcoholic beverages, except beers; alcoholic preparations for making beverages.”3 MIN READ↗
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Rebuttal evidence is permissible when defendants’ denial necessitates proving previously withheld material evidence.
The respondent-plaintiff instituted a suit seeking permanent injunction, rendition of accounts and damages against the petitioners-defendants for allegedly infringing and using the trademark “DRIPSEAL”.3 MIN READ↗
Bombay High Court
A mark combining generic and descriptive terms is unregistrable absent proven acquired distinctiveness.
Graviss Foods Private Limited applied on 17 January 2024 for registration of the word mark “ICE CREAM ROCKS”, claiming use from 10 June 2023. Application No. 6263527 was filed in Class 29 for, inter alia, milk and mil...4 MIN READ↗
Calcutta High Court
ITC’s trademark suit sent for pre-suit mediation as Calcutta HC refuses waiver after company first pursued police action
The plaintiff presented a plaint alleging infringement of intellectual property rights and passing off and sought dispensation of the pre-institution mediation requirement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Ac...3 MIN READ↗
Kerala High Court
Trademark infringement suits must be tried by District Courts even when their valuation falls within Munsiff jurisdiction, rules Kerala High Court
The respondent-plaintiff instituted O.S. No. 6 of 2024 before the I Additional District Court, Kozhikode, seeking a prohibitory injunction and damages for alleged infringement of its registered trade mark.3 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court orders BECO maker to withdraw campaign suggesting Vim and Surf Excel cause skin irritation, clarifies limits of comparative advertising
Hindustan Unilever Limited (“HUL”) sought an interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC against Kwick Living (I) Private Limited (“Kwick Living”) in respect of its advertising campaig...5 MIN READ↗
Telangana High Court
Telangana High Court says informed consumers—not the traditional “average buyer” test—should guide saree trademark disputes
The appellant-plaintiff, M/s Sai Silks (Kalamandir) Limited, instituted a suit for permanent injunction, trade mark infringement and passing off under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, read with Section 55 of the Copyright A...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Interim injunction requires prima facie proof that all essential patent claim elements are present.
The Appellants challenged the judgment dated 4 July 2025 by which the learned Single Judge dismissed their applications for interim injunction in a patent infringement suit concerning Indian Patent No. 244963, titled...4 MIN READ↗
Bombay High Court
13-year patent stalemate involving IIT Bombay: Bombay High Court recognises scientist as owner after worldwide assignment and orders fresh processing
The petitioner, Dr. Tarkeshwar Chandrakant Patil, was the original inventor named in Patent Application No. 2808/MUM/2013, filed on 28 August 2013 by IIT Bombay for an “Apparatus and a Method for In-Vivo Power Generat...5 MIN READ↗
Gujarat High Court
Counterfeit Apple accessories cannot be prosecuted as copyright offences; Gujarat HC quashes FIR over raid violating trademark safeguards
The petitioner invoked Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR C.R. No.11191026220492 of 2022, registered at Kalupur Police Station, Ahmedabad, for alleged offences under Sections 51, 63 and 64 of the Copyright Ac...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Passing off requires prior standalone trademark use generating goodwill; priority of adoption alone is insufficient.
ASR Market Ventures Private Limited (“ASR”), a fitness and wellness company, claimed adoption and use of the mark FITFEAST since June 2017 for nutrition, healthy-food, wellness-plan and related services offered throug...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Passing off requires prior standalone trademark use generating goodwill; priority of adoption alone is insufficient.
ASR Market Ventures Private Limited (“ASR”), a fitness and wellness company, claimed adoption and use of the mark FITFEAST since June 2017 for nutrition, healthy-food, wellness-plan and related services offered throug...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Pre-grant opposition hearing cannot replace mandatory Section 14 hearing before patent refusal, Delhi High Court rules
The Appellant challenged the order dated 21 November 2024 by which the Assistant Controller refused Patent Application No. IN201611009993, filed on 22 March 2016, concerning an improved process for preparing sugammade...4 MIN READ↗
Bombay High Court
Section 134 jurisdiction for trademark infringement does not extend to passing-off claims under Clause 14.
Metro Brands Limited filed a commercial IPR suit seeking an injunction restraining Met Brands Private Limited from infringing its registered trade mark “METRO” by using “METBRANDS”/“METBRANDS SHOES & BAGS”, along with...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Impugned hoardings and a declared Delhi place of business establish territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 CPC.
Hindustan Unilever Limited (“Appellant”) filed a commercial suit before the Delhi High Court seeking interim relief under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), alleging that Kwick Liv...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Review dismissed as Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories retains protection over “REDDY” mark in pharma business
Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. (“DRL”) instituted CS(OS) 2194/2003 against Reddy Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (“RPL”) concerning RPL’s use of the expression “REDDY” in the pharmaceutical business.4 MIN READ↗
Calcutta High Court
A co-publishing agreement does not novate original publication rights without clear substitution by all contracting parties.
Plaintiff No. 1 claimed to be the author and first owner of copyright in the books Applied English Grammar and Composition Anglo Bengali (For High Schools) and Beginner’s Applied English Grammar, Composition and Trans...5 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court refers online IP jurisdiction questions to Larger Bench amid conflicting rulings on territorial jurisdiction
Hindustan Unilever Limited (“HUL”) instituted a commercial suit seeking, inter alia, a permanent injunction restraining Kwick Living (I) Private Limited (“Kwick Living”) from broadcasting, publishing, hosting or commu...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Consent decree bars deceptively similar packaging while preserving use of “PASTA” and “KATORI” per se.
Respondent No. 1 instituted CS (COMM) No. 561/2026 alleging infringement of its trademarks, copyrights, and trade dresses, and obtained an ex parte ad interim injunction against the Appellant from using marks, labels,...3 MIN READ↗
Bombay High Court
Trademark-use disputes arising from franchise agreements are arbitrable when they concern inter-party rights in personam.
ZEE Learn Limited (“Petitioner”) granted Beauty Singh (“Respondent”) a franchise to operate a “Kidzee” centre at Koderma, Jharkhand, under a Franchise Agreement dated 20 January 2014, which expired by efflux of time o...4 MIN READ↗
Calcutta High Court
Heirs of former partner cannot claim rights in law firm’s goodwill or “Fox & Mandal” mark, Calcutta High Court rules in summary judgment
The plaintiff no. 1, a registered partnership firm constituted in 1896, has continuously provided legal services under the marks “Fox and Mandal”, “Fox & Mandal” and “F&M” and obtained trademark registrations, claimin...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Altering a trademark after examination mandates fresh scrutiny; failure warrants cancellation for procedural violation.
The Petitioner, Stonex India Private Limited, claimed prior adoption, extensive use, goodwill, and registrations in the mark STONEX and formative/device marks in relation to marble, granite, slabs, natural stones, and...4 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Wilful suppression of prior trademark notices costs pharma company ₹2 lakh as Delhi HC vacates ex parte injunction
The respondent, Celagenex Research (India) Pvt. Ltd., was the proprietor of the registered Class 5 trademark “NUREWIRE”, used for nutraceutical products.5 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Parties are bound by undertakings permitting existing trademark stock’s sale until 31 March 2027, subject to cessation thereafter.
The appellant challenged the order dated 5 June 2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in proceedings instituted by the respondents under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking removal/cancellation...2 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Subsequent trademark registration does not constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay in a commercial appeal.
The Appellant manufactured and sold homoeopathic medicines under the mark HASLAB’S DIGESTO, claiming use since 1 April 1971.2 MIN READ↗
Delhi High Court
Parties are bound by undertakings permitting existing trademark stock’s sale until 31 March 2027, subject to cessation thereafter.
The appellant challenged the order dated 5 June 2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in proceedings instituted by the respondents under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking removal/cancellation...2 MIN READ↗No articles match these filters.