Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

A battle for respect : Svamaan Financial Takes on Sammaan Capital in Trademark case

In a significant trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Svamaan Financial Services, granting an interim injunction against Sammaan Capital Limited and its affiliates. The Court found that the defendants’ marks were deceptively similar to Svamaan, potentially misleading consumers. The ruling reinforces the importance of brand identity and legal recourse in financial services.

Clarifying Patentability of Plant Treatment Methods under Section 3(h) and 3(i)

The Delhi High Court, in Syngenta Crop Protection AG vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, examined the rejection of an Indian patent application under Section 3(h) of the Patents Act. The Court ruled that plant treatment methods are distinct from agricultural processes, referring to the 2003 amendment to Section 3(i), and remanded the case for fresh examination with amended claims.

Court reiterates importance of protecting consumers from confusion in case of pharma products

The Delhi High Court deliberated a trademark infringement case between Modi MundiPharma and Win Health Pharma. Allegations of deceptively similar trademarks in pharmaceutical products were raised, with the Court emphasizing the risk of consumer confusion. The application to challenge the validity of the defendant’s marks was disposed of, framing key issues on the marks’ invalidity.

“ACTIV” Trademark watch by CASTROL leads to win against deceptively similar mark

The Delhi High Court granted Castrol Limited a permanent injunction and damages for trademark and copyright infringement against defendants marketing deceptively similar lubricants. The judgment highlights the significance of protecting established trademarks and the legal remedies available in Indian courts.

Court refuses interim injunction based on Patent Prosecution History

The Delhi High Court refused an interim injunction in a patent dispute over a fuel cap, citing ambiguous claims and prosecution history. The judgment highlights the need for precise claim drafting and careful interpretation in patent litigation.

Cannot drive on ‘VOLVO’ and ‘FMX’ marks’ reputation rules court

The Delhi High Court has upheld the reputation of VOLVO and FMX trademarks, granting an injunction against unauthorised use by Lamina Suspension Products Ltd. The court recognised VOLVO as a well-known mark and enforced a settlement restricting further misuse.

A jolly win for ‘JOLLY RANCHER’ against ‘JOKY RAMPER’

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction and damages to JOLLY RANCHER for trademark infringement and passing off by JOKY RAMPER. This decision underscores the importance of protecting trade dress and brand identity in the Indian confectionery market.

Revisiting Novartis versus Natco – Cancer drugs, divisional applications and patent validity

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of Novartis’s Ceritinib patent against Natco’s challenge, addressing divisional application issues and allegations of suppression. The injunction against Natco remains in force, reinforcing the enforceability of Novartis’s patent rights.

Delhi High Court Protects Hindware’s Trademark and Design Rights

The Delhi High Court has issued interim injunctions in favour of Hindware, restraining alleged trademark and design infringement by B.S. Tiles & Ors. The case highlights the court’s approach to safeguarding intellectual property in the sanitaryware sector.

ITC obtains injunction against former owners of NIMYLE and JOR-POWR Trademarks

The Delhi High Court granted ITC an interim injunction restraining Arpita Agro from using the mark POWRNYM, finding it deceptively similar to ITC’s NIMYLE and JOR-POWR trademarks. This case highlights the importance of respecting trademark rights and contractual obligations in the Indian legal context.