In the case of M/s Kamdhenu Limited v. Union of India & Ors., the Delhi High Court exercised suo moto jurisdiction under Article 226 to address procedural lapses by the Trade Marks Registry in accepting trademark applications. The Court found omissions in the Search Reports and noted the lack of application of mind by the Registry, prompting remand of the applications for fresh examination.
Read more about Delhi High Court Remands Trademark Applications for Re-ExaminationSquibb Secures Interim Injunction Against Zydus in Nivolumab Patent Dispute
The Delhi High Court has issued an interim injunction restraining Zydus from launching its Nivolumab biosimilar, siding with Squibb’s claim of imminent patent infringement.
Read more about Squibb Secures Interim Injunction Against Zydus in Nivolumab Patent DisputeMusic Creation and Copyright Transfers
In the case of Rajesh Jhaveri v. Saregama India Limited & Anr., the Bombay High Court dismissed a bid for interim injunction restraining Saregama from exploiting songs from three albums. The Court held that assignment agreements executed in the late 1980s granted broad rights to exploit the works “by any and every means w
Read more about Music Creation and Copyright TransfersCourt Allows Extraordinary Search to Protect Confidential Information
The Delhi High Court has permitted an extraordinary search to protect Ventum Dynamics Limited’s confidential information from potential misuse by a former consultant. The order includes the appointment of a Local Commissioner to inspect the Defendant’s premises and electronic storage, demonstrating robust interim protection for proprietary data.
Read more about Court Allows Extraordinary Search to Protect Confidential InformationRefusal without Effective Hearing? Not Valid: Delhi High Court on technical glitches in trademark hearings
In the case of Impresario Entertainment & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. v. Registrar of Trademarks, the Delhi High Court set aside a refusal of a Class 16 application. In simple terms, the Court said that an order passed without an effective hearing, and without dealing with the documents on file, cannot stand.
Read more about Refusal without Effective Hearing? Not Valid: Delhi High Court on technical glitches in trademark hearingsWill Intellectual Property Still Matter in 2034?
The Pathfinders 2034 report looks ahead to two possible futures for intellectual property — one fragmented and dominated by AI at the cost of human creativity, and another connected, inclusive, and balanced. While it sets out clear action points for governments, it rests on two untested assumptions: that IP drives innovation and creativity, and that it must remain central, merely adapting to new technologies. Without asking whether IP truly encourages human ingenuity in an AI driven world, or recognising its costs to access, public welfare, and follow on work, the vision risks repeating old mistakes. What is needed is a balanced, evidence based view that serves creativity, innovation, and the public good together.
Read more about Will Intellectual Property Still Matter in 2034?Internet rights in cinematographic films – Vasuki, Shenbaga Kottai, and Dubai Rani copyright infringement case
The Madras High Court, in a copyright infringement case involving Tamil films Vasuki, Shenbaga Kottai, and Dubai Rani, held that the plaintiff is the sole copyright owner of the internet rights and restrained the defendants from online exploitation. The Court awarded nominal damages for infringement.
Read more about Internet rights in cinematographic films – Vasuki, Shenbaga Kottai, and Dubai Rani copyright infringement caseTrademark Application Alone Not Enough for Infringement Suit
In Deepak Kumar Khemka v. Yogesh Kumar Jaiswal & Ors., the Delhi High Court held that filing a trademark application does not amount to trademark infringement. The Court dismissed the suit in limine, reiterating that infringement under the Trade Marks Act arises only from use in trade – not from proposed registration.
Read more about Trademark Application Alone Not Enough for Infringement SuitNo Injunction After Patent Expiry, Holds Delhi High Court
In the case of Kabushiki Kaisha Toyota Jidoshokki v. LMW Limited, the Delhi High Court refused to grant an interim injunction after the expiry of the patent in suit. The Court held that patent rights lapse with expiry and cannot be enforced thereafter.
Read more about No Injunction After Patent Expiry, Holds Delhi High CourtDelhi HC Remands Oxidation Process Patent Rejection, Cites Invalid Section 2(1)(j) and 59 Findings
In the case of Treibacher Industrie AG v. Assistant Controller of Patents, the Delhi High Court set aside the refusal of a patent application for a catalytic oxidation process. It held that the amended claims qualified as a process invention and were within the permissible scope of amendment under Section 59.
Read more about Delhi HC Remands Oxidation Process Patent Rejection, Cites Invalid Section 2(1)(j) and 59 Findings