Delhi High Court restrains Voltas Care from using VOLTAS trademark/Logo; Ex-parte injunction granted
Delhi High Court: Dinesh Kumar Sharma J. granted an ex parte injunction to Voltas Limited restraining a website from using their registered
injunction
Del HC directs Registrar of Domain names having offices outside India to ensure non escape of injunction orders passed by Indian Courts
Delhi High Court: Pratibha M Singh, J. issued directions to the registrar of domain names whose offices are situated outside India and
Titles of films are capable of being recognised under trademark law? Read Del HC’s decision in light of film ‘SHOLAY’
Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., expressed that, the word ‘SHOLAY’, is the title of an iconic film, and consequently, as
Permanent Injunction can’t be granted against true owner once the title dispute is settled; SC reverses three concurrent findings
Supreme Court: Reversing the concurrent findings of all the Court below in a case where the plaintiff was granted the relief of
Utt HC | Balance of convenience and irreparable loss to be proved in order to seek ex-parte ad-interim-injunction
Uttaranchal High Court: Ravindra Maithani, J. dismissed an appeal that challenged an order given by the court of Civil Judge pertaining to
Ker HC | Is not taking treatment for mental illness to bring out a peaceful family atmosphere a form of cruelty and thus, a ground for divorce? HC answers
Kerala High Court: In an interesting case the Division Bench of A.Muhamed Mustaque and C.R. Sophy Thomas, JJ., held that not taking
Baazi v. WinZo| Trademark is used by a manufacturer or service provider to distinguish products from those of competitors: Here’s how Winzo appeared dishonest and unfair in adopting Baazi
Delhi High Court: Explaining the significance of a trademark, Asha Menon, J., observed that, When people are satisfied with the products supplied
Raj HC | Objection with regard to pecuniary jurisdiction shall be taken at the first instance at the earliest possible opportunity in accordance with S. 21 CPC
Rajasthan High Court: Anoop Kumar Dhand J. allowed the appeal and quashed the impugned order dated 17-08-2021 passed by the Court of
Presumption of infringement under S. 29(3), Trademarks Act: Madras HC grants permanent injunction in favour of Bharatmatrimony
Madras High Court: G. Jayachandran, J., decided a matter with regard to infringing the registered trademark BHARATMATRIMONY. Present suit was filed for
Kar HC│ What is Yipee Magic Masala Noodles and Wai Wai Majedaar Masala Noodles copyright infringement battle all about? Read on
“Principles laid down for Courts to deal with injunction applications, in a pending suit, seeking relief against passing off” Karnataka High Court:
Are Courts bound to protect the interests of the “deity” in temple? Madras HC’s ruling on “Deity” in temple a “Minor”
Fraudulent and illegal encroachments of temple properties is a crime against the society at large.
Explained| Is a suit for injunction maintainable where the plaintiff’s title is in dispute?
Supreme Court: The bench of L. Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai, JJ has, in two judgments, has held that where the plaintiff’s
Mere reference to factual aspects to conclude question of law does not mean facts and evidence have been reappreciated: SC restates law on second appeal under S. 100 CPC
Supreme Court: A 3-Judge Bench of N.V. Ramana, CJI and A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. upheld the judgment of the Madras
Del HC | Will the rights of a prior user override those of subsequent user even though it had been accorded registration of its trademark? All-Inclusive Report on Trademark Infringement of ‘Rajdhani’
Delhi High Court: Jayant Nath, J., did a comprehensive analysis of the matter involving trademark infringement. Legacy of Rajdhani Plaintiff had originally
Del HC grants interim injunction in favour of DPS Society against Infringement of trademark and crest logo by Delhi Public International School
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J. while addressing the matter of trademark infringement, opined that, “Besides, considering that parties are in the
Bom HC | Denial of urgent hearing by DRT: Court says opportunity of hearing is integral part of constitutional philosophy well embedded in Arts. 14 and 21
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Sunil B. Shukre and Anil S. Kilor, JJ., held that mandate of Section 34 leaves
Bom HC | “Serum Institute coined the term ‘Covishield’, took substantial steps towards development and manufacture”: Court finds no merit in Cutis Biotech’s passing off action
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Nitin Jamdar and C.V Bhadang, JJ., upheld the order of the District Court refusing to
S. 6 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 is mandatory in nature, which acts as an injunction for Courts to follow; Supreme Court clarifies legal position
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., has observed that Section 6 of Probation of Offenders
Cal HC | No injunction can be passed restraining a party from instituting any proceeding in a court of law; Principles governing injunction order reiterated
Calcutta High Court: A Division Bench of Harish Tandon and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya JJ., while allowing the present appeal, discusses upon the essentials
High Court not obliged to frame substantial question of law if no error is found in First Appellate Court’s findings; says SC
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta* and Ajay Rastogi, JJ has held that the High Court is