{"id":336360,"date":"2024-11-30T19:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-11-30T13:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=336360"},"modified":"2024-11-30T17:56:07","modified_gmt":"2024-11-30T12:26:07","slug":"delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma&#8217;s &#8216;KIND&#8217; trademark"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Delhi High Court:<\/span> An appeal was filed by Novakind Bio Sciences Private Limited (appellants), seeking to challenge the order dated 07-08-2023 passed by Single Judge which confirmed the ad-interim injunction granted on 20-04-2021 restraining appellants from using the mark &#8220;NOVAKIND&#8221; or any similar mark. A division bench of <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Yashwant Varma<\/span> and Dharmesh Sharma, JJ., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits and upheld the view that the appellants&#8217; use of the mark <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;NOVAKIND&#8221;<\/span> was likely to cause confusion with the respondent&#8217;s registered trademark <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;MANKIND&#8221;<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The factual background revealed that Mankind Pharma (respondent) used the mark &#8220;MANKIND&#8221; since 1986 and holds 78 separate trademark registrations covering a variety of pharmaceutical products. The concern arose when Novakind (appellants) adopted the name <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;NOVAKIND&#8221;<\/span> for its pharmaceutical products, including a product called <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;DEFZAKIND&#8221;<\/span> (Deflazacort tablets). In response, the respondent issued a cease-and-desist notice on 25-08-2024, alleging trademark infringement and seeking an injunction to prevent the appellant from using <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;KIND&#8221;<\/span> as part of their branding.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Counsel for respondents focused on the phonetic similarity between the marks <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;MANKIND&#8221;<\/span> and <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;NOVAKIND<\/span>&#8221; and submitted that the use of <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;KIND&#8221;<\/span> was likely to cause confusion among the public, especially since <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;KIND&#8221;<\/span> had become a dominant and distinctive feature of the respondent&#8217;s trademarks. It was also asserted that the appellant&#8217;s use of <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;KIND&#8221;<\/span> for pharmaceutical products could mislead consumers into believing that the appellant&#8217;s products were part of the respondent&#8217;s well-established family of products. The respondent further pointed out that the appellants were possibly misrepresenting the registration of its trademarks and the location of its office on its products, exacerbating the potential for public confusion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court noted that from a reading of Section 29(2) of the Act, a registered trademark stands infringed by a person, who not being a registered proprietor or a person who uses the same by way of permitted use, uses a mark in the course of trade, which because of its identity with the registered trademark and the similarity of goods or services are covered by the registered trademark. In terms of subsection (2), a case of infringement would also be made out if the mark which is used by the alleged infringer and its similarity to the registered trademark together with the identity of the goods or services covered by such registered trademark is likely to cause confusion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court also noted that Section 29(4) of the Act sets out three circumstances in which a case of infringement would be established. The said provision too deals with a situation, where a person, who, not being a registered proprietor of the trademark, uses a mark which is identical with or similar to the registered trademark, and which may be used in relation to goods or services which are &#8220;not&#8221; similar to those associated with the registered trademark and where the registered trademark has a reputation in India.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court further observed that it becomes pertinent to note that while sub-section (2) deals with situations where the infringing mark is used in respect of goods or services which bear a similarity to the area in which the registered trademark operates, sub-section (4) extends to those situations where the mark may also be used in relation to goods or services, which may not be similar to those for which the trademark may be registered. Section 29(5) on the other hand, deals with a completely distinct situation and relates to the use of a registered trademark by a person as part of his trade name or name of his business concern.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court concluded that sub-sections (2), (3), (4) &amp; (5) of Section 29 deal with distinct contingencies and it would be wholly incorrect to view the use of a registered trademark as part of the trade name or name of a business concern being liable to be tested solely on the anvil of Section 29(5). Sub-sections (2), (3) &amp; (4) clearly appear and operate in separate silos. Thus, notwithstanding a deceptively similar adoption of a registered trademark as part of a trade name or the name of a business concern, such acts of infringement would also be liable to be decided based on prescriptions as contained in sub-sections (2), (3) &amp; (4) of Section 29.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Thus, the Court found that the mark &#8220;MANKIND&#8221; had become distinct and was likely to be confused with mark &#8220;NOVAKIND.&#8221; The injunction was justified based on the risk of consumer confusion and the similarity of the marks in the context of identical pharmaceutical goods. The appeal was dismissed, and the injunction continued in favor of the respondent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Novakind Bio Sciences Private Limited v Mankind Pharma Limited, FAO(OS) (COMM) 212\/2023, decided on 05-10-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000080;\">Judgment by: Justice Yashwant Varma<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Mr. Sushant Mahapatra, Mr. Rahul Kumar and Ms. Shruthi Uppvapali, Advocates for appellants<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Hemant Dawani, Ms. Saumya Bajpai, Mr. Rishabh Sharma, Mr. Shreyansh Gautam, and Mr. Saksham Dhingra, Advocates for respondents<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">Mankind Pharma used the mark &#8220;MANKIND&#8221; since 1986 and holds 78 separate trademark registrations covering a variety of pharmaceutical products. The concern arose when Novakind adopted the name &#8220;NOVAKIND&#8221; for its pharmaceutical products.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[72373,72377,72374,74858,75848,75847,75853,75851,72371,75854,72375,75849,74589,75850,75852],"class_list":["post-336360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-delhihighcourt","tag-injunctionorder","tag-intellectualproperty","tag-intellectualpropertyrights","tag-mankindtrademark","tag-novakindbiosciences","tag-trademarkcase","tag-trademarkconfusion","tag-trademarkdispute","tag-trademarkindia","tag-trademarkinfringement","tag-trademarkinjunction","tag-trademarklaw","tag-trademarkprotection","tag-trademarkrights"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Delhi HC upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-11-30T13:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma&#8217;s &#8216;KIND&#8217; trademark\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-11-30T13:30:00+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma&#8217;s &#8216;KIND&#8217; trademark\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi HC upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark| SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark","og_description":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-11-30T13:30:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma&#8217;s &#8216;KIND&#8217; trademark","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/","name":"Delhi HC upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-11-30T13:30:00+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma\u2019s \u2018KIND\u2019 trademark.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/delhi-high-court-upholds-injunction-novakind-bio-sciences-mankind-pharma-kind-trademark-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court upholds injunction against Novakind Bio Sciences for infringing Mankind Pharma&#8217;s &#8216;KIND&#8217; trademark"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":338384,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/03\/ipr-roundup-top-intellectual-property-rights-cases-2024\/","url_meta":{"origin":336360,"position":0},"title":"IPR Roundup 2024: The Most Game-Changing Intellectual Property Rights Cases of the Year","author":"Editor","date":"January 3, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Discover the year's most impactful IPR cases, including landmark decisions on copyright infringements, trademark conflicts, patent disputes, and more, shaping the future of intellectual property law.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legal RoundUp&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"2024 IPR cases","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/2024-IPR-cases.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/2024-IPR-cases.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/2024-IPR-cases.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/2024-IPR-cases.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280279,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/23\/rooh-afza-v-dil-afza-delhi-high-court-restrains-sadar-laboratories-from-manufacturing-or-selling-products-containing-trademark-dil-afza-till-final-disposal\/","url_meta":{"origin":336360,"position":1},"title":"[Rooh Afza v Dil Afza] Delhi High Court restrains Sadar Laboratories from manufacturing or selling products containing trademark \u2018DIL AFZA\u2019 till final disposal","author":"Editor","date":"December 23, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"The three tests of sound, sight and meaning are now well accepted for determining the similarity between competing marks and, similarity in any of the three aspects - visual impression, verbal sound, and meaning - may be sufficient to result in confusion. The question of similarity and the likelihood of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":300744,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/04\/delhi-hc-set-aside-the-order-restraining-royal-county-of-berkshire-from-using-polo-player-device-mark\/","url_meta":{"origin":336360,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court sets aside order restraining Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club from using its polo player device mark","author":"Editor","date":"September 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Appellate Court while hearing an appeal against an interim order ought not to disturb the prima facie findings, but it can substitute its own discretion when it is found that the Trial Court has exercised the jurisdiction in ignorance of settled principles of law.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":40653,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/03\/28\/no-interference-with-the-discretion-of-the-court-of-first-instance-unless-arbitrary-action-found\/","url_meta":{"origin":336360,"position":3},"title":"No interference with the discretion of the Court of first instance unless arbitrary action found","author":"Sucheta","date":"March 28, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: In a case relating to trademark passing-off between two media companies involved in the business of running online radio stations, a Division Bench comprising Gupta J. and Nandrajog J. dismissed the appeal, ruling that to interfere against an order declining to grant protem ad-interim injunction, perversity has\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":274141,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/21\/delhi-high-court-grants-injunction-against-a-website-using-tata-mark-targeting-indian-public\/","url_meta":{"origin":336360,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court grants injunction against a website using TATA mark &#8220;targeting&#8221; Indian public","author":"Editor","date":"September 21, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"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.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"competitive exam","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":278026,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/25\/vogue-fashion-magazine-v-vogue-fashion-institute-no-trademark-infringement-or-passing-off-committed-by-the-institute-holds-karnataka-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":336360,"position":5},"title":"[Vogue Fashion Magazine v. Vogue Fashion Institute] No trademark infringement or passing off committed by the Institute, holds Karnataka HC","author":"Editor","date":"November 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant appeal filed by \u2018Vogue Institute of Management\u2019 challenging the Trial Court's permanent injunction restraining the appellants to use the trademark \u2018VOGUE\u2019 as a part of their name and trading style, the Bench of M.I Arun J., held that the respondent publishes\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Karnataka-High-Court-2-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/336360","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=336360"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/336360\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=336360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=336360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=336360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}