Delhi High Court passes John Doe injunction order restraining use of mark WOW MOMO
There are unknown entities holding themselves as authorized franchise agents of Wow Momo Private Limited, whereas it has, in fact, no franchisees.
injunction
Bombay High Court declares ‘ATOMBERG’ as a well known trademark in India
The Plaintiff is a company engaged in manufacturing marketing and selling a wide variety of home appliances, such as ceiling fans, pedestal fans, wall fans, exhaust fans, mixer grinders, smart door locks, and accessories thereof, such as fan remote, fan motor, fan canopy, fan blades, etc. under the trade mark/trade name ATOMBERG since 2012.
‘Just looking like a wow!’; Delhi High Court grants injunction in favour of Body Cupid Private Limited for its ‘WOW’ mark
The plaintiff’s case is that it uses the brand ‘WOW’ for many products, including supplements, herbal blends, creams, serums, lotions, shampoos, bath & body products, essential oils, etc.
Delhi High Court| Tata Sons shall cease to use ‘XPERT’ as trademark but use EXPERT in a non-trademark sense in a descriptive manner for its detergent product
The grievance of RSPL Limited is the use of the mark EXPERT and depiction of the partial clock on the detergent packaging of the defendants as also the use of the word expert and use of the elongated X and DX.
Delhi High Court grants injunction against Mankind Pharma Limited for infringing Hind Chemical’s ‘SU-MAG’ packaging
The plaintiff’s main product line includes an ointment meant for relief of boils and abrasions famously known as ‘SU-MAG’ and also manufactures ‘MAG-MAG’, ‘CREMOBAR’, ‘COFEX’, ‘GLYCERIN’, ‘SUPPOSITORY’ as well as other ayurvedic products namely ‘Livzon Syrup and Capsule’ and ‘Imminex Syrup and Capsule’.
Delhi High Court allows Mankind Pharma Limited to run modified advertisement on DMF Quality APIs with disclaimer
Delhi High Court directed Mankind Pharma Limited to run a modified advertisement i.e., original advertisement with the disclaimer that DMF is not mandated under Indian law and is not a quality norm for products in India.
Anti-Arbitral Injunctions: Defeating Party Autonomy or Preventing Abuse of Arbitral Process?
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 83
Delhi High Court refuses injunction in favour of NILKAMAL for its word mark; Grants injunction in favour for its device mark
The marks have to be compared as a whole mark, thus compared, there is no phonetic similarity between NILKAMAL and NILKRANTI.
Delhi High Court grants injunction in favour of Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries for its mark ‘SUN’
The suit was filed against the marks FERTISUN used per se as well as with the suffixes F and L as FERTISUN-F and FERTISUN-L and the corporate name of the defendant ‘LaurenSun Remedies Pvt Ltd’.
Delhi High Court decrees against various domain names from using the mark AAJ TAK or alike
As per a status report dated 20-11-2023, the use of the mark ‘AAJ TAK’ has been disabled on all channels, and the domain names have been either suspended, locked or blocked.
Delhi High Court restrains rogue websites from disseminating copyright content of Universal City Studios
Technology has posed a major challenge for entities like the Plaintiffs as there is a proliferation of many platforms including websites from where unauthorised, unlicensed and pirated content of the Plaintiffs can be downloaded, accessed and viewed by customers and viewers.
Delhi High Court directs The Wire to remove alleged defamatory article on Delhi Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar
While freedom of speech and expression is sacrosanct, the reputation of a person earned over several decades, cannot be sacrificed at the altar of such freedom, when the impugned publication, ex-facie, contains unsubstantiated allegations and defamatory imputations, regardless of the truth.
Delhi High Court refuses interim relief to ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel seeking supply of LNG from GAIL in November 2023
The procurement of LNG may become onerous as had happened in August and December 2022 but no irreparable loss and injury would result to the ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel.
Delhi HC grants stay on Tiz Hazari Court’s order vacating ad-interim injunction restraining Home Needs from using marks ‘POLO LIFETIME’, ‘RALPH LAUREN’ and word ‘POLO’
“The trade marks POLO/RALPH LAUREN/POLO PLAYER DEVICE are liable to be recognized as ‘well-known’ marks as defined under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.”
[UP Revenue Code] Plaint cannot be rejected in an Injunction suit not seeking demarcation of boundaries: Allahabad HC
“Proceedings under Section 24 of the UP Revenue Code, 2006, are summary in nature while an injunction suit filed by the respondent is a regular suit.”
[Paristone v. Prestige] Delhi High Court restrains manufacturers from using trade dress identical to “PRESTIGE” mark for its pressure cookers
“That defendants have chosen to imitate the manner in which plaintiff prints its logo is itself testimony to the goodwill and reputation of plaintiff, in the perception of defendant itself.”
Delhi High Court restrains Franchisebyte from advertising, publishing video reflecting WOW! MOMO mark
“In a case such as this, if injunction is not granted ex parte, it would result in the defendant continuing to defraud the public at the expense of the plaintiff.”
Delhi High Court restrains China Social from using mark ‘SOCIAL’ for services related to food; grants injunction to Impresario Entertainment and Hospitality (P) Ltd.
“There is every likelihood of defendant’s cloud kitchen services being perceived as another extension of plaintiff’s services owing to the nature of the ‘SOCIAL’ series of marks used by plaintiff.”
Delhi High Court grants interim injunction to SmithKline Beecham Limited for its ‘GSK’ mark
“Considering that the plaintiff operates in the pharmaceutical and medicinal sector and is also registered for the ‘GSK’ mark, the use of an identical mark, especially in an identical colour combination, is clearly dishonest and mala fide.”
Delhi High Court directs selling unfilled cans with infringed RED BULL marks till 31-01-2024; Directs damages of Rs. 13 lakhs
The unfilled cans which have been seized, shall be released in favour of the Defendants, which were given to them on a superdari basis, in the presence of a representative of the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s representative may accordingly visit the Defendants’ premises on 01-11-2023 at 11:00 a.m.