Calcutta High Court | Intellepedia

When Delay Becomes Denial: Calcutta High Court Overturns Patent Rejection

The recent judgement of the Calcutta High Court in BASF SE v. Joint Controller of Patents warrants attention for multiple reasons, particularly as it addresses...

Hybrid Cell Inventions: Section 3(j) of the Patents Act Does Not Apply

In a recent decision, the Calcutta High Court upheld an appeal filed by BTS Research International Pty Ltd (“BTS”) challenging the rejection by the Assistant...

The sticky trademark fight between “FIGHTER” and “FITTER”

The Calcutta High Court has granted interim relief to Kamal Kumar Hirawat, restraining Maruti Poly Films from using the trademark “FITTER.” The Court held that the mark was deceptively similar to the petitioner’s registered trademark “FIGHTER,” used for adhesive tapes since 1995, and could cause consumer confusion, potentially harming the petitioner’s business.

Micky Metals runs out of “LUX”, Court issues injunction against using “LUX TMT” Trademark

The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Biswanath Hosiery Mills, granting a permanent injunction against Micky Metals for passing off the “LUX” trademark. The Court emphasized the Plaintiffs’ prior use and substantial goodwill, holding the Defendant’s mark “LUX TMT” deceptively similar. Remedies included profit accounting since 2009 and the prevention of further use.

Trademark Exhaustion: Resale of lawfully acquired TMT Bars does not amount to Trademark Infringement

The Calcutta High Court denied an interim injunction to SRMB Srijan Pvt. Ltd., which sought to prevent the resale of its TMT bars by defendants citing trademark infringement. The Court held that resale of lawfully acquired SRMB products did not violate trademark rights, as per the Trade Marks Act, 1999, pending further investigation of alleged unauthorized territorial sales.

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

The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Biswanath Hosiery Mills, holding that Micky Metals’ use of the “LUX TMT” mark constituted passing off. The Court granted a permanent injunction, emphasizing that the Plaintiffs’ trademark rights extended even to dissimilar goods.

Unreasoned Post Grant Opposition Decision Set Aside by the Calcutta High Court

In the case of Terex India vs. CDE Asia, the Calcutta High Court remanded the patent dispute for fresh consideration, citing procedural flaws and inadequate reasoning in the original decision. The Court emphasized the need for impartiality and ordered that the case be reviewed by a different officer to ensure a fair outcome.

Only Officers having Quasi Judicial Authority Can Pass Trademark Orders, says the Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Visa International Ltd., quashing orders issued by Associate Managers who lacked the legal authority under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The court emphasized the necessity of proper authorization for quasi-judicial functions within the Trademark Registry.

Jumbo Tramples Haathi Trademark Registration

The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Girnar Food & Beverages Pvt. Ltd., overturning the Registrar’s decision and quashing the registration of a deceptively similar ‘HAATHI’ mark by Bicrampore Tea Estate. This ruling underscores the significance of consumer perception and the potential for deception in trademark disputes.

Clarifying Product-by-Process Patent Claims in India – West Bengal Chemicals v. GTZ

In a recent ruling, the Calcutta High Court dismissed WBCIL’s appeal seeking an interim injunction against GTZ, providing clarity on product-by-process claims under the Indian Patents Act, 1970. The judgment highlights the crucial role of expert testimony in establishing patent infringement.

Tag: Calcutta High Court