HIGH COURT JULY 2024 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Stories on Reliance; Rights of Disabled Persons; NEET UG 2024; Organ trafficking; Bhopal Gas Tragedy and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
trademark infringement
Can the Court pass orders for trademark infringement in an execution petition? Delhi HC answers
“It is immaterial if the term or directions in a decree is contrary to law. The Executing Court cannot go behind the same, and has to give effect to the decree.”
[Domino’s v. Donito’s] Delhi HC grants interim injunction to Dominos IP Holder for its mark Domino’s in relation to pizzas and burgers
The Court was satisfied that plaintiff 1 — Domino’s IP Holder LLC had made out a prima facie case for grant of an ex-parte ad interim injunction, as they were likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the injunction was not granted.
Delhi High Court grants injunction against Fab India Emporium for trademark infringement of Fab India marks
“Invoices issued by the defendant have also been procured which exhibit that they are selling products not only in their store under the name of “FAB INDIA EMPORIUM” but they are also selling their products under the same tradename.”
Delhi High Court restrains ‘Baap Ki Adalat’ for infringing Rajat Sharma’s popular show ‘Aap Ki Adalat’ marks
Independent News Service Private Limited was incorporated in the year 1997 by its Chairman and Editor-in-Chief, Rajat Sharma and got the permission from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government to uplink its 24 hours Hindi News channel called INDIA TV.
[Karim’s v. Karin’s] Delhi High Court rules in favour of Karim’s trademark in infringement suit
“The Defendants have entirely imitated Plaintiff No. 1’s registered trademarks, replicating all aspects such as font of the letters, design of the logo, color scheme, size, style, and placement of letter and the taglines. Both the marks are also used for identical services.”
Delhi High Court grants interim injunction in favour of Bulgari S.P.A for its design infringement of Serpenti Necklace by Amaris Flagship
The Court was prima facie satisfied that Amaris Flagship’s impugned “Shield-It Necklace” is visually and structurally similar, with similar colour combinations and placement of elements/ ornamentation, to Bulgari S.P.A.’s “Serpenti Ocean Treasure Necklace”.
[SPARX v HRX] Delhi High Court refuses injunction against Hrithik Roshan’s XS Brands Consultancy for using mark ‘X’
Plaintiff’s X mark is derived from their ‘SPARX’ logo and has been used in a standalone form in relation to its footwear products sold under the ‘SPARX’ brand. Plaintiff’s grievance is against the defendants who started using defendants’ X mark, which was deceptively similar, for footwear as well, being identical goods.
[Eveready v Everyday] Delhi High Court grants ad interim injunction in favour of Eveready Industries for trademark infringement
The case arises from the alleged infringement of Eveready’s trademarks by the defendants. Eveready contends that the defendants’ use of the mark “EVERYDAY” for electric gas lighters is deceptively similar to Eveready’s “EVEREADY” trademark.
Delhi High Court upholds Dolma Aunty Momos trademark; Cancels infringing trademark registration
The ruling sets a precedent for protecting established brands and upholding the integrity of trademark registration processes. The cancellation of the infringing trademark serves as a deterrent to potential trademark violators, emphasizing the importance of respecting intellectual property rights in commercial activities.
Use of “Dish” deemed non-infringing trademark; Delhi High Court rejects interim injunction against Prasar Bharti’s DD Free Dish
The word ‘DISH’ is a common English word which denotes Dish Antenna and cannot be described as a prominent or an essential feature of such nature so as to allow the plaintiff a monopoly over its use. The two products at dispute were “DD Free Dish” by Prasar Bharti (Doordarshan) and “Dish TV” by Dish TV India Limited.
[NOVA v NOVYA Trademark Dispute] Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction in favour of Sterling Agro Industries
Sterling Agro Industries emerges victorious in the trademark clash between NOVA and NOVYA, as Delhi High Court decrees in their favor, enforcing a permanent injunction against the defendants and awarding litigation costs.
HIGH COURT JANUARY 2024 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Pepsico Potato chips battle; Right of convict to procreate; Manual scavengers; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Calcutta High Court dismisses Berger Paint’s trademark infringement plea against JSW Paints due to lack of deceptive similarity
The Calcutta High Court stated that Trademark dilution protects well-known trademarks from losing their appeal when used in connection with diverse and dissimilar products or services.
Madras HC injuncts Nirlon Kitchenware from infringing and passing off Prestige’s lid from its Svachh series of pressure cookers
Madras High Court said that the lids were identical as the design was one and the same and added that the Prestige was in the market of manufacturing pressure cookers for a long time and their trade mark is well known and their turnover was huge
HIGH COURT DECEMBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Maternity Leave to Contractual Employee; Marital Rape; Booking.com vs MMT; Appointment of Law Officers and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
[INIMOX v IMOX] Madras High Court directs mark “INIMOX” to be registered only for products intended for veterinary use and not for human use
“Be it in infringement or passing off actions, or in the context of an application for registration and objections being raised on relative grounds – the visual, phonetic and structural similarity between the later and earlier marks will, as in all cases, play a significant role.”
Madras HC directs Registrar to cancel trade mark registration granted to Khoday breweries for ‘Red and White’, being similar to well-known mark of Godfrey Phillips
“once it is concluded that the earlier trade mark is a well-known trade mark, the registration of an identical or similar trade mark is not permitted if the use of the later mark without due cause would take unfair advantage of or be detrimental to the distinctive character or reputation of the earlier trade mark”
Delhi High Court discharges contemnors guilty of interfering in the function of Local Commissioner on unconditional apology
The contemnors apologised and stated that the entire incident is quite unfortunate and though facts have been misrepresented before the instant Court, however, they do not intend to disobey the orders of the Court and that the respondents have great respect for the Court.
HIGH COURT NOVEMBER 2023 WEEKLY ROUNDUP| Stories on Maternity leave to surrogate mother; 1999 rape & murder case; TN Online Gaming Act; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.