{"id":351542,"date":"2025-06-26T12:30:36","date_gmt":"2025-06-26T07:00:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=351542"},"modified":"2025-06-26T12:46:15","modified_gmt":"2025-06-26T07:16:15","slug":"2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/","title":{"rendered":"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Stay updated with key 2024 High Court rulings on intellectual property law. This concise overview highlights recent cases on trademark infringement, passing off, patentability, domain names, and copyright \u2014 shedding light on how courts are shaping IP rights and protections in India<\/p>\n

\n

A. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 Ss. 57<\/a>, 47<\/a> and 91<\/a><\/span> \u2014 Jurisdictional Scope of High Courts to entertain cancellation\/rectification petitions under Trade Marks Act \u2014 Observed, every High Court, where dynamic effect of trade mark registration is felt will have jurisdiction \u2014 Dynamic effect \u2014 Applicability of \u2014 Held<\/span>, \u201cdynamic effect\u201d presumes casus omissus which was not the intention of the legislature \u2014 Application of dynamic effect concept expands scope beyond explicit provisions \u2014 Indirectly fills gaps that legislature did not address [Hershey Co. v. Dilip Kumar Bacha<\/span>, (2024) 1 HCC (Del) 461<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

B. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 Ss. 29(2)(c) and 29(3) \u2014<\/span> Trade mark \u2014 Infringement of, when disputed mark identical to registered trade mark and used in relation to identical goods\/services \u2014 Identity of rival marks and rival goods in context of claim of injunction \u2014 Statutory presumption of confusion \u2014 Held<\/span>, as per S. 29(2) registered trade mark is infringed by person, who not being registered proprietor or permitted user, uses in course of trade, mark which because of eventualities mentioned in S. 29(2)(a), (b) and (c), is likely to cause confusion on part of public, or have association with registered trade mark \u2014 Eventuality stipulated in S. 29(2)(c) is identity with registered trade mark and identity of goods or services covered by registered trade mark \u2014 S. 29(3) provides that when trade mark of alleged infringer is identical with registered trade mark and goods or services are identical, court shall presume that it is likely to cause confusion on part of public [Citizen Watch Co. Ltd.<\/span> v. Dineshkumar Laxmanbhai Virda<\/span>, (2024) 2 HCC (Del) 707]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

C. Intellectual Property \u2014 Copyright \u2014 Copyright Act, 1957<\/a> \u2014 S. 21<\/a> \u2014<\/span> Deemed relinquishment of copyright \u2014 Author declaring renunciation \u2014 Sanyasi authoring many religious books and assigning copyright to the plaintiff Trust \u2014 Held<\/span>, right acquired by an individual in a work, which is the result of his intellectual activity, is called his copyright and by being a saint or an ascetic, person does not lose exclusive right in his copyright \u2014 Law of copyright has to protect a man’s copyright irrespective of his status as a family man or saint \u2014 Right would stand extinguished in the hands of the renunciate, only if the person transfers or relinquishes the right by a process known to law, and not otherwise \u2014 Held on facts, relinquishment has not occurred [Bhaktivedanta Book Trust India v. www.Friendswithbooks.co<\/span>, (2024) 2 HCC (Del) 438]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

D. Intellectual Property Law \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 S. 2(m) \u2014<\/span> Passing off, misappropriation and unfair competition \u2014 Infringement of trade mark \u2014 Plaintiff registered owner of trade mark \u201cBHIDU\u201d contending that personal name \u201cJackie Shroff\u201d protectable as trade mark \u2014 Held<\/span>, name \u201cJackie Shroff\u201d carries substantial goodwill and an esteemed reputation, exclusively linked to the plaintiff \u2014 Name is protectable as trade mark and being a personal name, stands on a higher footing than the use of a trade mark in relation to goods\/services \u2014 S. 2(m) of the 1999 Act specifically includes \u201cname\u201d in the definition of \u201cmark\u201d [Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf v. Peppy Store<\/span>, (2024) 2 HCC (Del) 253]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

E. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 S. 35 \u2014<\/span> Saving for use of name, address or description of goods or services \u2014 Risk associated with registering mark which lacks inherent distinctiveness \u2014 Interference with use of one’s name as trade mark \u2014 Impermissibility of \u2014 Held<\/span>, one who obtains registration of common name, or surname, as trade mark in his favour, does so with risks that such registration entails \u2014 It is open to anyone to use his name on his goods, and, therefore, possibility of there being several identical mark looms large \u2014 Proprietor cannot, by obtaining registration for Jindal as word mark, monopolise use of Jindal \u2014 Right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) of the Constitution include freedom to lawfully express one’s identity \u2014 Right of person to use her, or his, own name on her, or his, own goods, cannot be compromised [Jindal Industries (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. Jindal Sanitaryware (P) Ltd.<\/span>, (2024) 3 HCC (Del) 742]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

F. Intellectual Property \u2014 Patents \u2014 Patentability\/Patent Protection\/Patent Law in India \u2014<\/span> Two separate patents secured in respect of same product \u2014 Coverage vis-\u00e0-vis disclosure \u2014 Held<\/span>, dichotomy between coverage and disclosure in patent strike at very root of rationale of law of patent \u2014 Under scheme of patent, at end of patent term the invention belong to people at large who may be benefited by it \u2014 Broad claim which covers large number of compounds with common inventive concept at its core, also referred to as Markush claim, is permissible provided same is not overbroad or vague \u2014 Protection would extend to substances disclosed as well as to those that are not specifically disclosed but are obvious to person skilled in art and\/or can be anticipated [Natco Pharma v. Novartis AG<\/span>, (2024) 3 HCC (Del) 669]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

G. Intellectual Property \u2014 Patents \u2014 Patents Act, 1970<\/a> \u2014 Ss. 3(k), 11<\/a>, 15<\/a> and 117-A<\/a> \u2014<\/span> Patentability of computer-related inventions \u2014 Appellant claiming that subject patent application provided technical solution to resolve conflicts between multiple wireless servers \u2014 Controller rejected patent claim as claimed protection was over sequence of instructions which does not qualify for patent protection under S. 3(k) of the 1970 Act \u2014 Held<\/span>, subject patent’s core functionality relies heavily on series of logical instructions to manage data dissemination and privacy settings which are characteristic of algorithmic processes \u2014 Therefore, patent’s technical contribution is sequence of instructions guiding system operations, such as detecting data, evaluating policies, and resolving conflicts using conditional logic \u2014 Approach based on algorithmic processes, which do not qualify for patent protection under S. 3(k) of the 1970 Act [Blackberry Ltd. v. Controller, Patents<\/span>, (2024) 4 HCC (Del) 471]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

H. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 Ss. 30(3)<\/a> and 30(4)<\/a><\/span> \u2014 Sale of refurbished goods, by refurbisher, with trade mark of original manufacturer \u2014 When permissible and does not amount to trademark infringement \u2014 Held<\/span>, \u201csale of goods in the market\u201d or \u201cgoods having been put on the market\u201d would mean goods along with registered mark \u2014 Goods originally bore registered trade mark of original manufacturer \u2014 S. 30(4) entails where goods entered into market with registered mark, but its condition changed or impaired, which include removal of original trademarks, and refurbished goods identified with original manufacturer, manufacturer’s right kicks in to prevent same [Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International<\/span>, (2024) 4 HCC (Del) 265<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

I. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Domain Names \u2014<\/span> Infringement by third parties \u2014 Domain Name Registrars (DNR) to enforce court orders \u2014 Role of RBI \u2014 Legal measures in relation to non-compliance by Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) \u2014 Held<\/span>, law enforcement agencies raising concerns against various banks not following standard operating procedures \u2014 Banks and DNRs directed to inform Delhi Police of important information \u2014 Meeting of the sub-groups and sub-committees of Indian Banks Association allowed to continue in order to ensure that all banks follow the SOP in respect of information disclosure mechanism to the law enforcement agencies [Dabur India Ltd. v. Ashok Kumar<\/span>, (2024) 4 HCC (Del) 19<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

J. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Passing Off<\/span> \u2014 Proprietor of registered, well-known, reputed, and prior used trademarks \u201cAMUL\u201d seeking protection against \u201cpassing off\u201d and filing suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against alleged infringer selling its confectionary items under disputed marks \u201cAmuleti\u201d \u2014 Held<\/span>, proprietor is prior user of well-known trademark \u201cAMUL\u201d \u2014 Further, use of identical and deceptively similar trademark leads to dilution \u2014 Use of mark similar to proprietor\u2019s well known, reputed, and registered trademark likely to cause confusion among consumers \u2014 Proprietor demonstrated prima facie case for grant of injunction, which if not granted will cause it to suffer irreparable loss \u2014 Balance of convenience also lies in favour of proprietor, and against infringer [Gujarat Coop. Milk Mktg. Federation Ltd. v. Terre Primitive<\/span>, (2024) 5 HCC (Del) 132<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

K. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 S. 25(3)<\/a><\/span> \u2014 Removal of trade mark of registered proprietor from register for non-renewal of registration \u2014 Validity \u2014 Despite non-renewal petitioner’s trade mark continued to be reflected in trade mark register \u2014 Right of petitioner for renewal when trade mark not removed from register and no notice for removal or renewal issued \u2014 Held<\/span>, in absence of a notice issued under sub-section (3) of S. 25 of the Trade Marks Act, any removal of trade mark from register of trade marks as maintained by Registrar cannot be recognized \u2014 Legal right of petitioner to seek renewal of registration of trade marks in question, subsist [Motwane (P) Ltd. v. Registrar, Trademark<\/span>, (2024) 1 HCC (Bom) 464<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

L. Intellectual Property \u2014 Patents \u2014 Patentability\/Patent Protection\/Patent Law in India \u2014<\/span> Identifying inventive concept embodied in invention \u2014 Mosaicing\/combining prior art \u2014 Held<\/span>, set of technical features is regarded as combination of features if functional interaction between features achieves combined technical effect which is different from sum of technical effects of individual features \u2014 Invention claimed must normally be considered as a whole \u2014 When claim consists of \u201ccombination of features\u201d, not correct to argue that separate features of the combination taken by themselves are known or obvious and that \u201ctherefore\u201d whole subject-matter claimed is obvious \u2014 However, where claim is merely \u201caggregation or juxtaposition of features\u201d and not true combination, it is enough to show that individual features are obvious to prove that aggregation of features does not involve inventive step [Rhodia Operations v. Controller, Patents<\/span>, (2024) 1 HCC (Mad) 140<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

M. Intellectual Property \u2014 Trade marks and Passing Off \u2014 Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> \u2014 Ss. 31(1)<\/a>, 9<\/a>, 11<\/a> and 17(1)<\/a> \u2014<\/span> Effect of registration of parts of a mark \u2014 Plaintiff-respondent sought permanent injunction for restraining infringement of trade mark, copyright and passing off rendition of account \u2014 Presiding Officer granted temporary injunction rejecting objection filed by respondent \u2014 Defendant-appellant contending that term \u201cPatta\u201d commonly used in trade, challenging exclusive rights granted to plaintiff’s trade mark \u201cHara Patta\u201d \u2014 Appeal filed by defendant \u2014 Held<\/span>, S. 17(1) confers exclusive right to use trade mark as a whole on proprietor \u2014 Appeal dismissed [Sai Chemicals v. Jai Chemical Works<\/span>, (2024) 1 HCC (All) 113<\/a>]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Explore latest Cases reported in SCC’s High Court Cases (HCC) shaping Intellectual Property Laws which covers trademark infringement, patentability, passing off, and domain name disputes. A holistic view of evolving jurisprudence on intellectual property laws in India.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67522,"featured_media":351550,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,68098],"tags":[84170,71958,84176,84174,84178,68396,56040,84179,84180,83562,84172,84175,84173,52951,84171,84177],"class_list":["post-351542","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-high-court-cases","tag-2024-ip-case-law-india","tag-cases-reported-in-hcc","tag-copyright-relinquishment","tag-delhi-high-court-ip-rulings","tag-domain-name-disputes","tag-hcc","tag-high-court-cases","tag-high-court-trademark-injunctions","tag-inventive-step-patent","tag-latest-high-court-cases","tag-passing-off-cases","tag-patent-act-section-3k","tag-patent-law-judgments","tag-trade-marks-act-1999","tag-trademark-infringement-2024","tag-well-known-trademarks-2024"],"yoast_head":"\nLatest 2024 IP Judgments on Trademarks, Patents & Copyright | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"A roundup of latest 2024 IP law judgments from Indian High Courts on trademarks, patents, passing off, and copyright. Essential legal insights for practitioners and scholars.\" \/>\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\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"A roundup of latest 2024 IP law judgments from Indian High Courts on trademarks, patents, passing off, and copyright. Essential legal insights for practitioners and scholars.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-06-26T07:00:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-06-26T07:16:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Niyati\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Niyati\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 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\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/\",\"name\":\"Latest 2024 IP Judgments on Trademarks, Patents & Copyright | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-26T07:00:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-26T07:16:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/9fcdd3f9b1656d3c86b93c274ac0851e\"},\"description\":\"A roundup of latest 2024 IP law judgments from Indian High Courts on trademarks, patents, passing off, and copyright. Essential legal insights for practitioners and scholars.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"2024 Intellectual Property Judgments\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property\"}]},{\"@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\/9fcdd3f9b1656d3c86b93c274ac0851e\",\"name\":\"Niyati\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3fb20d70fc1002554a7094c80f8d54c0f3dad0fd7c5b119db6833ce4c54a5115?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3fb20d70fc1002554a7094c80f8d54c0f3dad0fd7c5b119db6833ce4c54a5115?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Niyati\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/niyati\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Latest 2024 IP Judgments on Trademarks, Patents & Copyright | SCC Times","description":"A roundup of latest 2024 IP law judgments from Indian High Courts on trademarks, patents, passing off, and copyright. Essential legal insights for practitioners and scholars.","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\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property","og_description":"A roundup of latest 2024 IP law judgments from Indian High Courts on trademarks, patents, passing off, and copyright. Essential legal insights for practitioners and scholars.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-06-26T07:00:36+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-06-26T07:16:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Niyati","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Niyati","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/","name":"Latest 2024 IP Judgments on Trademarks, Patents & Copyright | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp","datePublished":"2025-06-26T07:00:36+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-26T07:16:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/9fcdd3f9b1656d3c86b93c274ac0851e"},"description":"A roundup of latest 2024 IP law judgments from Indian High Courts on trademarks, patents, passing off, and copyright. Essential legal insights for practitioners and scholars.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"2024 Intellectual Property Judgments"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/26\/2024-ip-judgments-trademark-patent-copyright\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property"}]},{"@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\/9fcdd3f9b1656d3c86b93c274ac0851e","name":"Niyati","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3fb20d70fc1002554a7094c80f8d54c0f3dad0fd7c5b119db6833ce4c54a5115?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3fb20d70fc1002554a7094c80f8d54c0f3dad0fd7c5b119db6833ce4c54a5115?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Niyati"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/niyati\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/shared-image-2025-06-26T124308.452.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":370583,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/23\/2024-key-high-court-judgments-intellectual-property-high-court-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":351542,"position":0},"title":"Cases Reported in HCC | Latest High Court Cases on Intellectual Property","author":"Nikita","date":"December 23, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Explore latest Cases reported in SCC\u2019s High Court Cases (HCC) shaping Intellectual property Laws which covers trademark infringement, patentability, passing off and Brand name disputes. A holistic view of evolving jurisprudence on intellectual property laws in India.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property High Court Cases","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Intellectual-Property-High-Court-Cases.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Intellectual-Property-High-Court-Cases.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Intellectual-Property-High-Court-Cases.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Intellectual-Property-High-Court-Cases.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":329956,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/03\/intellectual-property-rights-roundup-with-top-ip-cases-july-2024\/","url_meta":{"origin":351542,"position":1},"title":"Intellectual Property Rights | A quick view of top Intellectual Property cases from July and August 2024","author":"Apoorva","date":"September 3, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick recap of top Intellectual Property cases on sale of counterfeit copies of EBC\u2019s books, Nizam\u2019s trade mark, Mankind v. Mercykind, Adidas, L\u2019Or\u00e9al, Electronica, and more.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property Rights Roundup","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":352720,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/08\/legal-roundup-intellectual-property-right-roundup-june-2025-copyright-infringement-trade-mark-infringement-scc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351542,"position":2},"title":"INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the latest Intellectual Property Rights rulings from June 2025.","author":"Editor","date":"July 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"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.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property Rights Roundup June 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":325977,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/07\/top-intellectual-property-cases-june-2024-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351542,"position":3},"title":"Intellectual Property Rights | A quick view of top Intellectual Property cases in June 2024","author":"Editor","date":"July 7, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick recap of Intellectual Property cases passed by the High Courts in the month of June 2024 along with some top stories on Domino\u2019s, Infosys Trademark Infringement, Patent for Portable Vehicle Management System and much more.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property cases Roundup June 2024","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Intellectual-Property-cases-Roundup-June-2024.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Intellectual-Property-cases-Roundup-June-2024.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Intellectual-Property-cases-Roundup-June-2024.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Intellectual-Property-cases-Roundup-June-2024.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":344598,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/28\/issuance-of-injunction-essential-in-cases-of-blatant-ipr-violations-to-safeguard-both-private-public-interests-rajasthan-high-court-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":351542,"position":4},"title":"Issuance of injunction essential in cases of blatant IPR violations to safeguard both private & public interests: Rajasthan High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"March 28, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court found that the respondents\u2019 label is a near replica of the appellant\u2019s trademark and design, including the \u201cSwastik\u201d symbol, which has been consistently used by Rajani Products since 1983.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Rajasthan High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":355782,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/06\/intellectual-property-rights-july-2025-roundup-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":351542,"position":5},"title":"IPR July 2025: A quick recap of the Months\u2019 top Intellectual Property Rights cases","author":"Sonali Ahuja","date":"August 6, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Covering all the important IPR cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, links to other roundups, latest legal updates in criminal law and a few top stories of the month.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property Rights July 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-July-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351542","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\/67522"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=351542"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351542\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/351550"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=351542"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=351542"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=351542"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}