Trademarks | Intellepedia

Use of e-Rickshaw Trademark ‘Yatri’ by Competitor Restrained

The Delhi High Court has issued an injunction restraining the use of the “YATRI” trademark and images by a competitor in the e-rickshaw industry. The decision addresses concerns of trademark infringement and consumer confusion, with further hearings set for January 2025.

Nandini Deluxe v. Hotel Nandini: Court holds that both can continue using their trademarks

The Bengaluru court held that both Nandhini Deluxe and Hotel Nandini can continue using their trademarks as the word Nandini was found to be generic. Neither party proved exclusive rights or trademark infringement, resulting in dismissal of both claims.

VIVO sticks strong against VIVO adhesives, rewarded with well-known trademark status in India

The Delhi High Court declared VIVO a well-known trademark in India after finding infringement and passing off by an adhesive manufacturer. The Court issued a permanent injunction and set out legal criteria for determining well-known status and trademark protection under Indian law.

Court Orders Take Down of Influencer’s Disparaging Videos and Posts about Sugar in Complan

The Delhi High Court ordered an influencer to take down disparaging videos about Complan’s sugar content, finding the statements misleading and damaging to Zydus’ trademark. The court highlighted the responsibility of influencers to ensure accuracy, particularly in health-related content.

VANS obtains injunction against Trademark infringement under John Doe principles

The Delhi District Court granted VANS a permanent injunction against trademark infringement and counterfeiting by Mr. Gopal Goyal under the John Doe principles. The judgment emphasises the protection of trademark rights and the consequences of passing off in India.

“CLARIWASH” Cleans Up: L’Oréal’s Trademark appeal drenched

The Delhi High Court dismissed L’Oréal’s appeal against the CLARIWASH trademark, finding no deceptive similarity or grounds for cancellation. Procedural errors during examination were not considered sufficient for removal, and the respondent’s prior use was recognised.

Evecare Trademark: Himalaya’s Prior Use Prevails Over Wipro’s Class Differentiation

The Delhi High Court dismissed Wipro’s appeal against an injunction favouring Himalaya’s prior use of the EVECARE trademark. The court held that prior user rights and likelihood of confusion prevailed over trademark class differences in this passing off case.

Ensure Diabetes Care’s Advertisement Disparages Horlicks Diabetes Plus, says the Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has restrained the circulation of Ensure Diabetes Care’s advertisement for disparaging Horlicks Diabetes Plus. The ruling addresses the limits of comparative advertising and highlights key principles concerning disparagement and intellectual property rights in India.

Passing Off Suit: ‘LUX’ Trademark Protected by Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court protected the ‘LUX’ trademark in a passing off suit, granting a permanent injunction against the Defendant. This case underscores the significance of prior use and goodwill in trademark disputes.

Good Karma prevails for Upakarma yet again, court affirms injunction against Trademark infringement

The Delhi High Court affirmed an interim injunction against Rasayanam for using packaging deceptively similar to Upakarma’s registered trademark for Shilajit. The Court reiterated that overall trade dress similarity can lead to consumer confusion, justifying continued restraint at the interim stage.