TrademarkLaw
Own Name Defence in Trade Marks| Delhi High Court protects jewellery firm’s right to use founder’s name ‘Vasundhara’; No injunction granted
The appellant, Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., incorporated in 1999, claims continuous use and registration of the mark VASUNDHRA for jewellery, while the respondent, Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP, incorporated in 2016, traces its mark VASUNDHARA to its founder Vasundhara Mantri, who has used the name in business since 2001.
Delhi High Court grants Dynamic Injunction against Amazon, Flipkart, Snapdeal, Meesho & Others in Reliance trademark suit
The defendants were found to be commercially manufacturing, marketing, and selling various FMCG products. These include Poha, Wheat Flour, Makhana, Pulses, Lentils, Salt, and similar goods. They did so using Reliance’s well-known and registered ‘RELIANCE’ and ‘JIO’ trademarks without authorization.
Swagath vs Hotel Swagath: Delhi High Court issues notice in Trademark Suit; Next hearing on August 27
The Plaintiff is operating popular hotels and restaurants under the name “Swagath” in New Delhi and franchise models across North India and the defendant, Hotel Swagath, is a Telangana-based hotel group established in 1991, with 11 operational outlets.
Delhi High Court rejects OSWAL’s trademark appeal for ‘ONE FOR ALL’ mark as descriptive and non-distinctive
“Mere reliance on sales figures, promotional expenditure, or broad assertions of popularity, without cogent documentary substantiation connecting such use exclusively to the mark “ONE FOR ALL”, is insufficient.”
Delhi High Court refuses injunction against YouTuber in Doctor’s Choice Protein Review Case, Upholds influencer’s free speech backed by lab reports
Influencer marketing has emerged as a pivotal force in India’s digital landscape reshaping how consumers connect with brands across sectors, from fashion and beauty to food, technology and finance.
Delhi High Court awards ₹30.91 lakh costs & damages to Himalaya for ‘Liv.52’ trademark infringement by ‘Liv-333′
The unauthorized use of the “LIV” element in a manner that does not materially differentiate the defendants’ mark from the plaintiffs’ well-established “Liv.52” mark amounts to a violation of the plaintiffs’ statutory rights.
‘No deceptive similarity to each other’; Delhi High Court upholds bona fide use of surname ‘JANGID’ as trademark
The plaintiff uses the mark ‘JANGEER’, whereas the mark of the defendant includes an ‘I’ in place of ‘EE’ and ‘D’ in place of ‘R’ i.e., ‘JANGID’. Apart from the difference in the spellings of the marks of the plaintiff and the defendant, the manner and style of writing is also completely different. The added features in the defendant’s mark make it quite distinct from the plaintiff’s mark.
Delhi High Court awards ₹3.34 cr damages against Medserve for selling counterfeit Johnson & Johnson surgical products
“By selling counterfeit medical products, the defendants have not only inflicted substantial financial loss upon the plaintiff but have also misled the consumers who purchased these products under the false belief that they were genuine. Given the gravity of the infringement and the extent of harm caused, compensatory damages alone would be inadequate to compensate the plaintiff.”
Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of IKEA in trademark infringement case against IKEY
The similarity between the conflicting marks ‘IKEA’ and ‘IKEY’ is such that it cannot be mere co-incidence and a case of ignorance.
Delhi High Court stays trademark registration of ‘JACK DANIELS’ being violative of Section 9(2)(a) & Section 11 of Trade Mark Act, 1999
It is the case of the petitioner that they have been using the mark “JACK DANIEL’S” since 1895 in respect of alcoholic beverages. The petitioner is the registered proprietor of various trademarks including “JACK DANIEL’S” and other formative parts.
Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma’s ‘KIND’ trademark
Mankind Pharma used the mark “MANKIND” since 1986 and holds 78 separate trademark registrations covering a variety of pharmaceutical products. The concern arose when Novakind adopted the name “NOVAKIND” for its pharmaceutical products.
Delhi High Court grants John Doe order to protect Dream11’s trademark rights against unidentified infringers
Dream 11 is a fantasy sport league is an online multi-player game where participants draft virtual teams of real players of a professional sport. These virtual drafted teams get points based on the performance of the players in actual games.
Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of New Balance Athletics against local shoe company for trademark infringement
The present suit seeks a permanent injunction against trademark infringement, passing off, and unfair competition arising from the sale of footwear featuring marks that are nearly identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s established N Device and 550 marks.
Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Yahoo Inc. against trademark infringement by ‘YAAHOO!’ Mouth Freshener
Yahoo Inc.’s investigation revealed that the defendant was producing a mouth freshener under the name “YAAHOO! Mouth Freshener.” that closely resembled the established trademark “YAHOO!”, leading to allegations of trademark infringement and passing off.