Bombay High Court | Intellepedia

Atomberg fans or Luker fans, whose “fan” are you?

Two futuristic pedestal fans labeled "Atomberg" and "Luker" face each other in a dark, dramatic setting. The Atomberg fan glows with blue neon light, while the Luker fan glows red. Wind blasts collide in the center, scattering debris and creating visible sparks, symbolizing intense rivalry or conflict.

The Bombay High Court dismissed Atomberg’s appeal against the denial of an interim injunction in a design infringement case against Luker. The court ruled that Atomberg’s fan design lacked novelty due to prior publication and was merely a trade variant.

Knowledge Theft : Property includes Intellectual Property, affirms Supreme court

The Supreme Court of India upheld the Bombay High Court’s interpretation that intellectual property, including research data, qualifies as ‘property’ under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This decision enables victims of caste-based atrocities to claim compensation for loss of intellectual assets. The ruling affirms the protection of knowledge-based assets and expands the legal definition of property under the Act.

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.

Court Directs Meta to Take Down Deepfake Videos of NSE CEO in Urgent Ruling

The Bombay High Court directed Meta and other intermediaries to promptly take down deepfake videos of the NSE CEO, citing obligations under IT Rules 2021. The court’s ruling highlights intermediary liability and the need to protect investors from misleading content.

“Be mindful when exercising quasi judicial power, cryptic orders unacceptable” says Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court ruled that cryptic and uncommunicated orders by the Registrar of Trade Marks violate procedural fairness. The court mandated a fresh review of the trademark application, reinforcing the importance of reasoned decisions in quasi judicial processes.

Full and Transparent Disclosure of Material Facts for Ex-parte Injunctions

The Bombay High Court vacated an ex-parte injunction in a trademark dispute due to Atyati’s suppression of material facts regarding Cognizant’s prior logo use. This decision reiterates the necessity for full and transparent disclosure in ex-parte proceedings.

Novartis says No to Novarish

The Bombay High Court granted Novartis an injunction against Novarish Healthcare for trademark infringement and passing off. The court found the marks deceptively similar and protected Novartis’s established rights under Indian IP law.

Diabetic Product XigaMet Loses to ZitaMet Under Heightened Pharma Trademark Scrutiny

The Bombay High Court has restrained Gleck Pharma from using XIGAMET for its diabetes product, finding it deceptively similar to Glenmark’s ZITA-MET. This decision highlights the Court’s heightened scrutiny in pharmaceutical trademark cases to prevent consumer confusion and associated health risks.

Pidilite Contains Astral from infringing its Container Design

The Bombay High Court has restrained Astral from infringing Pidilite’s registered container design, finding substantial similarity and upholding the design’s novelty and distinctiveness. The judgment clarifies key aspects of visual appeal and prior publication in Indian design law.

Court halts release of film exploiting Karan Johar’s celebrity status

The Bombay High Court halted the release of a film using Karan Johar’s name, citing unauthorised exploitation of his celebrity status. The court recognised his personality rights and restrained the defendants from using his name or attributes in the film.