Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The defendants were operating an 11-room hotel by the name of ‘Bukhara Inn’ and had refused to comply with the cease and desist notice sent by ITC Ltd.
“The distinctive features should be discussed in order to decide as to whether the two packets/trade dresses, viewed as a whole, would cause confusion in the mind of end consumers or not.”
“The power of rectification is exercisable only by the High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction over the appropriate office of the Trade Marks Registry, wherein the entry relating to the impugned mark is made.”
“The Court Receiver was directed to visit and search all premises of the defendants, forcibly breaking open locks if necessary and taking police assistance where required to seize and seal all offending goods.”
“The dominant feature of the marks WOW MOMO and WOW BURGER is clearly the prefix ‘WOW’, as the suffix in each mark merely refers to the food item in respect of which the mark is being used. The dominant feature of the two marks, i.e. WOW, is identical.”
“The use of trade name ‘ALCHEM’ on the defendant’s packaging material in addition to the generic names is likely to cause confusion in the mind of customers of average intelligence.”
Ravi Mohan Studios produced an additional typed-set showing that the attempted registration of the trade mark ‘BROCODE’ by Indo Bevs beverage company had been objected to and is pending consideration. Hence the Court issued interim relief.
“Since 2011, through campaigns like ‘You Can Be Anything’ and initiatives such as the Shero program and Fashionistas collections, Mattel has promoted inclusivity, diversity, and women’s empowerment. With a vibrant online presence, scholarly attention, and millions of fans worldwide, the trademark BARBIE has evolved into a multifaceted brand symbolizing imagination, aspiration, and inspiration for generations.”
“The identity in the defendant’s marks is so close to Mankind’s trade marks that the two are indistinguishable. The infringing activities of the defendant is likely to cause confusion in the course of trade of Mankind leading to erosion of consumers’ trust.”
“The infraction of the rights of the appellant can take place in various shapes like dilution of its mark, initial interest confusion, and actual confusion.”
“The defendant has affixed the plaintiff’s trade mark HAVELI with another word i.e., ‘PUNJABI’ and the word ‘PUNJABI’ has been incorporated in such a small font, that it remains insignificant to the eyes of the viewers misleading the customers into believing that the defendant’s restaurant is associated with the plaintiff.”
The defendants were operating several websites and applications to trick the general public into believing that they were representatives/associates of Zepto and so as to scam them into paying for fake job opportunities with Zepto
In July 2025, Tata Sons (P) Ltd. discovered Defendant 1’s website, ‘https://www.tatapayment.net/’ offering digital payment services while wholly incorporating trade marks, ‘TATA’, ‘TATA PAYMENTS’.
The Defendants were operating several websites and applications to trick the general public into believing that they were associated with Premji Invest so as to scam them into illegal and fraudulent investments.
“The actions of defendant 1 are misleading unsuspecting customers, resulting in them sharing their confidential information and spending their hard-earned money on these infringing platforms. It is evident that defendant 1 are trying to create the impression that their websites, Social Media Groups, are associated with INDmoney”
“This Court while dealing with edible items for human consumption, owes a duty of exercising a greater degree of care, caution as also to apply a more stringent test to avoid any possibility/likelihood of confusion between different edible products amongst the general public.”
“Sonu Nigam Singh’s actions could not be considered innocent, and the misrepresentation caused among members of the general public was not a matter of coincidence and thus his conduct was ex facie dishonest and reeked of mala fide.”
“If the infringement of the trade mark ‘Old Monk Coffee’ is allowed to continue, it is likely to cause confusion on the part of the public and the defendant obviously would be able to pass off its product, ‘OLD MIST’ rum, as that of the petitioner i.e., ‘Old Monk’.”
“The plaintiff’s registered trade mark and artistic work is infringed by the defendants, and it is likely to cause confusion in the minds of the public, thus, unless ad-interim reliefs are granted, the plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss, harm, and injury.”
Covering all the important intellectual property rights cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, latest legal updates in intellectual property rights and links to other roundups.