Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

Yatra Trademark Claim Rejected: No Monopoly Over Common Travel Terms, Says Court

In the case of Yatra Online Limited v. Mach Conferences and Events Limited, the Delhi High Court examined whether a travel company could claim exclusive rights over the term ‘YATRA’. Concluding that the mark was descriptive and not distinctive, the Court refused to restrain the defendant from using a similar mark.

Cannot raise new ground while refusing patent, rules Delhi High Court

Illustration with text "New grounds for patent refusal?" in orange font on a light purple background, alongside a yellow hand pointing upward with the word "NO" repeated on each finger.

Delhi HC set aside a patent refusal against Proprietect L P, citing violation of natural justice, failure to consider amended claims, and lack of reasoning.

Delhi High Court Patent Injunction: Aquestia Wins Against Automat Industries

A 3D-rendered digital image depicting a legal and engineering theme. The foreground shows a judge's gavel resting on legal documents with metal fittings and coins scattered nearby. In the background, mechanical valve systems are integrated with justice scales, symbolizing a legal dispute over industrial components, likely fluid control valves. The scene combines elements of law and technology, representing a patent conflict or court ruling in an engineering context.

Delhi High Court grants patent injunction to Aquestia, stopping Automat from selling Hydromat valves over suspected patent infringement.

Patented But Still Infringing: Delhi HC Stops Hydromat Valve Sales

Close-up view of industrial metal control valves and piping system, showing aged and weathered valve wheels used for regulating fluid flow.

In the case of Aquestia Limited vs Automat Industries Private Limited & Ors., the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing and selling their ‘Hydromat’ valves. The court held that even a patented product can infringe an earlier patent, and found that the defendants’ valves incorporated the core features of the plaintiff’s fluid control valve patent claims.

Delhi High Court Remands Trademark Applications for Re-Examination

A warning sign with a yellow background and black border displaying the text "WARNING: PROCEDURE LAPSES AHEAD" under a triangular caution symbol, indicating potential procedural errors or issues.

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.

Squibb Secures Interim Injunction Against Zydus in Nivolumab Patent Dispute

Laboratory pipette with DNA and molecular structures representing biotech research

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.

Refusal 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.

Trademark Application Alone Not Enough for Infringement Suit

Comic-style image illustrating a courtroom scenario. On the left panel, a judge asks a person, "Have you used the trademark?" The person responds, "No, but I intend to!" In the right panel, the word "DENIED" appears boldly in red letters on a bright yellow background.

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.

No Injunction After Patent Expiry, Holds Delhi High Court

An elderly woman in traditional clothing operates a spinning wheel in a dimly lit room. The word "EXPIRED" is prominently overlaid across the image in bold white letters.

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.

Delhi HC Remands Oxidation Process Patent Rejection, Cites Invalid Section 2(1)(j) and 59 Findings

Green chalkboard with various hand-drawn organic chemistry structures and chemical equations, including benzene rings, hydroxyl groups, and molecular formulas like N₂ + 3H₂ → 2NH₃, representing chemical reactions and compounds.

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.