Case Reviews | Intellepedia

Madras HC Awards ₹20 Lakhs Compensation in Amma Memorial Digital Project Dispute

In the background a museum with lighting visuals the overlay text reads, 'Amma memorial digital project dispute: The Case of Praveen Raj Jayachandran v. Fusion VR'

The Madras High Court resolved the Amma Memorial Digital Project dispute by awarding reasonable compensation for partial software development and concept creation. The judgement clarified copyright ownership, absence of profit-sharing rights, and the basis for determining damages in software-related project collaborations.

Trademark Trouble Brewing: What ‘COX 5001’ Got Wrong About ‘HAYWARDS 5000′

A bottle of Haywards 5000 beer placed centrally on a rustic stone table, surrounded by ripe red tomatoes, herbs, and a metal pot, styled like a still-life painting with warm, earthy tones.

Bombay High Court grants AB Inbev a permanent injunction against Jagpin’s “COX 5001” mark, ruling it infringes the “HAYWARDS 5000” and “FIVE THOUSAND” trademarks.

Delhi High Court Grants Patent Application Restoration After Agent’s Error

Illustration of a courtroom with wooden benches and judge's bench; inset shows a cartoon man scratching his head with a lightbulb over it, symbolizing a sudden realization or mistake.

Delhi High Court restores Synertec’s patent application, ruling that agent error, not intent, caused the missed Form-18 deadline.

Ilaiyaraja Cannot License Naguva Nayana, Delhi HC Says Producer Owns Copyright

In the case of Saregama India Limited vs Black Madras Films & Ors, the Delhi High Court upheld the copyright ownership of the plaintiff over the song Naguva Nayana, rejecting composer Ilaiyaraja’s authority to license it. The Court said the defendants could release their film only after depositing a licence fee, if they continued to use the song.

Can Claims Presumptively Inherit the Priority Date of a Provisional Application?

Close-up of a person circling a date on a calendar, symbolizing checking timelines

In Rallis India Limited v. Deputy Controller of Patents and Others, the Madras High Court refused to assume that claims automatically inherit the priority date of a provisional, especially where the crucial EC formulation emerges only in the complete specification. The decision pushes the Patent Office to treat priority and prior art questions as matters for analysis, not default settings.

Himalaya Trademark Infringement: Delhi HC Grants Injunction

Medicinal plants and mortar pestles, set in a light green background below the text, 'Himalaya Trademark Infringement– Delhi High Court'

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction to Himalaya Wellness, restraining Greenland Trading from using deceptively similar marks for ayurvedic products. The Court found a clear risk of consumer confusion and dilution of the well-known HIMALAYA trademark.

Film Shivajiraje Bhosale Boltoy Fails Copyright Test: Title, Script, and Ads Not Infringing

Yellow banner with a 3D clipboard showing a red X and check marks, alongside the text “Film Shivajiraje Bhosale Boltoy Fails Copyright Test: Title, Script, and Ads Not Infringing.

In the case of Everest Entertainment LLP vs. Mahesh Vaman Manjrekar, the Bombay High Court considered whether copyright subsists in the title Me Shivajiraje Bhosale Boltoy, and whether the defendants infringed the script or promotional content of the film. The Court found no substantial reproduction of the script or advertisements, and held that copyright protection does not extend to the film’s title.

Section 3(i) Rejection Set Aside: Court Clarifies Scope of Pharmaceutical Patent Claims

Banner image showing a human brain against a blue molecular/network background, with overlaid text: “Section 3(i) Rejection Set Aside: Court Clarifies Scope of Pharmaceutical Patent Claims”.

The Delhi High Court reiterated that a properly drafted pharmaceutical composition claim cannot be dismissed as a “method of treatment” under Section 3(i), and has sent Medilabo’s neurodegenerative drug application back for a full, merits-based examination.

Delhi HC Grants Injunction in Adidas Counterfeit Socks Case

Black and white socks in black background with the title 'Adidas Counterfeit Socks Case' written in bold white font.

The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction to Adidas in a trademark infringement and passing-off case concerning counterfeit socks. The Court also appointed a Local Commissioner for seizure and inspection, reinforcing strong protection against IP violations.

BADAL Trademark Rectification and Assignment Fraud

A magnifying glass and a pen placed over a document titled Trademark Assignment Agreement.

The Delhi High Court rejected a rectification petition challenging the assignment of the BADAL trademark on grounds of alleged fraud. The Court held that the Petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence to prove fraud or invalidate the registration, upholding the mark’s validity.