HIGH COURT APRIL 2023 ROUNDUP| 100+ Stories on Aarey Car Shed Project; Kanpur Bar Association Strike; Bhushan Steel scam; Rahul Gandhi’s Defamation Case; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts in April 2023
trademark infringement
[Trademark v. Domain Name] Bombay HC holds trademark infringement suit is an action in personam; Court cannot impose a blanket ban on “Swiggy” mark in future
“The Court held that in every case of trademark infringement, the plaintiff claiming infringement of its registered mark is required to claim relief in the context of specific instances of infringement, relatable to individuals against whom orders can be passed by the Court.”
Delhi High Court grants ex-parte ad-interim injunction to American Eagle against Ektarfa Garments in a trademark and copyright infringement suit
Delhi High Court: In a case where application was filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section
Delhi High Court awards Rs. 20 lakhs costs to Louis Vuitton in a trade mark infringement case against Club Factory
Delhi High Court: In a case where Club Factory was involved in the sale of various unauthorized/ counterfeited products, bearing
The term ‘FLY HIGH’ used by Vistara is common to aviation; Delhi High Court vacates interim injunction granted in favour of Frankfinn
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Limited (‘plaintiff’) seeking permanent and mandatory injunction restraining
Delhi High Court grants ad interim injunction against Nine Network website for posting defamatory content regarding Oyo Rooms
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Oravel Stays Limited doing business as OYO Rooms (plaintiff) is seeking damages
Delhi High Court rules on the application of S. 124 Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the standards of pleadings required to satisfy the ingredients of the provision
Delhi High Court: In an application filed by the plaintiff seeking permission to file rectification/cancellation petition against registrations of Defendant’s
Delhi High Court| Higher standards of probity expected from IPR lawyers to not imitate logo which is already in existence
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed seeking permanent injunction restraining trademark infringement, copyright infringement and passing off against Ms.
[Fevikwik v Fixokwik] “Fixokwik” deceptively similar, hence, restrained; Bombay High Court grants ad interim relief in favor of FeviKwik
Bombay High Court: In a suit filed by Pidilite Industries Limited (plaintiff) seeking ad-interim reliefs against defendants for selling adhesive
[T-series v Tata] Delhi High Court record settlement between TATA motors and T-series for not using ‘T-series’ marks on Tata automobiles
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited, seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement, passing off,
Delhi High Court held RAJNIPAAN guilty for infringement for adopting deceptively similar mark and replaced ‘GANDHA’ with ‘PAAN’ with an intention to ride upon goodwill and reputation of RAJNIGANDHA
The trademark RAJNIGANDHA has been declared as a well-known mark by this Court and is entitled to a high degree of protection. The impugned mark is visually and structurally deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs’ trademark.
Delhi High Court restrains APPLEPLANT being deceptively, visually and semantically similar to APPLESTREE
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed for injunction by the Plaintiff restraining the Defendant from selling, offering for sale,
Tag line ‘PEHLE CHECK KAREN PHIR VISHWAS KAREN’ is identical and deceptively similar to tag line ‘PEHLE ISTEMAL KAREN PHIR VISHWAS KAREN’; Delhi Court restrains GTM Jewelry Mart
While determining whether there is infringement of trademark, one is not required to see dissimilarity, but one is required to see similarity and there is similarity of all words except one word, in the present case.
Delhi High Court permanently injuncts GRAND VIVANTA from using VIVANTA mark; Adopts new name GRAND VIHAN
The permanent injunction passed shall come into effect from 1-11-2022.
Delhi High Court | No need for injunction in favour of Colgate as Custom authorities denied import of infringing goods in India
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Colgate Palmolive Company (‘plaintiff’) seeking permanent injunction, restraining infringement of trademark COLGATE,
Delhi High Court denies grant of exclusive right to use the name ‘VASUNDHRA’ for being a common name in India
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Vasundhara Jewelers Private Limited (‘plaintiff’), praying for an ad-interim injunction restraining the
Delhi High Court grants injunction against a website using TATA mark “targeting” Indian public
The considerations, while deciding an application for grant of ad-interim injunction could be less stringent than the one for final relief in a suit. Interim decisions are required to be made based on probable rather than a definitive view.
Delhi High Court grants ad-interim injunction against Tensberg having phonetic similarity with Carlsberg
The advertisements on the Facebook page and YouTube channel alone, in my prima facie opinion, cannot be sufficient to deny the plaintiff its statutory rights as a registered proprietor of the mark.
Delhi High Court| COKE STUDIO and COOK STUDIO arrived settlement; COOK STUDIO adopted new mark COOK Pro 6
Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Nikhil Chawla (‘plaintiff’) for its brand COOK STUDIO in the nature of threat application
Delhi High Court grants ex parte ad interim injunction against Jamshedpur based restaurant SOCIAL 75 for using the registered trademark SOCIAL
Delhi High Court: In a trademark infringement suit filed by a company namely, Impresario Entertainment and Hospitality Pvt Ltd. (‘plaintiff’) running a