Intellectual Property Insights: Trademark Case Updates from Indian High Courts

Intellectual Property law continues to adapt and evolve, and recent judgements from Indian High Courts provide vital insights into its current trajectory. This blog post examines four notable cases, each shedding light on different aspects of IP law, from trademark infringement to the nuances of domain names. By offering a clear and concise overview of these significant rulings, this post aims to enhance understanding of IP law for professionals and enthusiasts.

Himalaya Vs. Vimalaya: Producer agrees to remove ‘Vimalaya’ from the movie ‘Aachar n Co.’

Himalaya filed a  trademark suit before the Delhi High Court alleging that the use of ‘Vimalaya’ and other brands such as  ‘Liv. 52’ in the movie ‘Aachar n Co.’ violates its trademark rights. The producer of the movie agreed to blur and delete references to ‘Vimalaya’ and other brands, and the Delhi High Court disposed the case on the condition of release on OTT after such blurring and deletion. While disposing the case, the Court asked the CBFC to review the certification of the movie expeditiously.
Citation: Himalaya Wellness Co. v. PRK Productions LLP, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8062

‘Chakra Kolhu’ for Edible Oils prima facie infringes the trademark ‘Chakra’, but Chakresh and Chakrika are not infringing, says the Delhi High Court.

In a case involving the trademark ‘Chakra’ for edible oils, the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction against the use of ‘Chakra Kolhu’. But, the Court refused an injunction against ‘Chakresh’ and ‘Chakrika’ holding that the marks are not similar to ‘Chakra’. The Court in the case rejected the argument that the mark is descriptive or publici juris based on the number of registrations bearing the word, chakra.
Citation:  IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI; CS(COMM) 568/2021 & I.A. 14686/2021, I.A. 16119/2021

Winzo Vs. Winzos for online games: Delhi High Court restrains the use of ‘Winzos’, and asks Google to take down the apps and Chrome extensions.

In a case involving the trademark ‘WINZO’ for online and mobile games, the Delhi High Court held that ‘WINZOS’ infringes the trademark, and passed a permanent injunction against its use. The Court asked Google to take down the apps and Chrome extensions using the trademark, and ordered the domain name registrar to transfer the domain name to the plaintiff. As claimed by the plaintiff, ‘WINZO’ games are popular, and have been endorsed by celebrities like MS Dhoni, Ranvir Singh, and so on.
Citation: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI; CS(COMM) 135/2023, I.A. 14938/2023 & 15282/2023

Sanofi Vs. Zanofi for Pharma Products: The Delhi High Court restrains use of ‘Zanofi’ as trademark and corporate name.

In a case involving the trademarks ‘Sanofi’ and ‘Zanofi’ for pharma products and drugs, the Delhi High Court restrained the defendant from using the mark ‘Zanofi’ as a trademark or corporate name. While passing the interim order, the Court refused to permit the defendant from selling the pending stock as the volume of products was very high.

These recent decisions from Indian High Courts are key in shaping the landscape of IP law. Through these summaries, we aim to offer essential insights into how these rulings influence IP practices. We hope these regular case updates are valuable for legal experts, business professionals, and academics in navigating the dynamic world of Intellectual Property.

If you have any questions, speak with an IP expert/attorney – [email protected] or 91-80-26860414/24/34.