Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

A stylized laboratory scene showing a large blue capsule being constructed by steampunk-style mechanical arms, with sparks flying. A wooden sign next to the capsule reads "UNDER CONSTRUCTION," symbolizing a drug still in development. Various lab equipment is visible in the background.

In the case of Helsinn Healthcare SA vs AET Laboratories, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a patent infringement action filed in anticipation of future infringement. The Court examined the territorial reach of Indian courts in web-based patent matters and reaffirmed the principles required to sustain quia timet actions.

Delhi High Court Grants Permanent Injunction in LAHORI ZEERA Trademark Infringement Case

Delhi HC restrains Balaji Foods from using the LAHOR ZEERA mark, upholding Archian Foods’ IP rights over LAHORI ZEERA’s trademark, label, and design.

Court favors AR Rahman, rejects claims that Dagar Brothers composed Shiva Stuti

Music composer at studio desk with headphones; banner text reads “Court favors AR Rahman, rejects claims Dagar Brothers composed Shiva Stuti.”

The Delhi High Court ruled that the Dagar Brothers were not the authors of Shiva Stuti, setting aside an earlier order and supporting AR Rahman’s appeal. The decision clarifies that authorship and originality are essential for copyright protection in Indian classical music.

Strategic Delay Costs Novartis Its Cross-Examination Rights

Banner with text “Tactical Delay Proves Costly for Novartis” beside a clock and wooden blocks spelling DELAY on an orange background

The Delhi High Court dismissed Novartis’s writ petitions, ruling it had waived cross-examination by opting for rebuttal evidence. The Controller’s orders were upheld, with the patent already revoked days earlier.

Non-Disclosure of Prior Art in Hearing Notice Violates Natural Justice, Rules Delhi High Court

3D illustration of repeating blue molecular structures representing chemical compounds, symbolizing scientific formulations or agrochemical compositions.

In Croda Inc. v. Controller of Patents, the Delhi High Court emphasized procedural fairness and ruled that the non-disclosure of prior art in a hearing notice constitutes a breach of natural justice. The Court remanded the case for fresh evaluation.

Winning the Race for ‘X1’: A Trademark Dispute Resolved

X1-branded jetski races ahead on a track as cars chase.

The Delhi District Court resolved the X1 trademark dispute between Ashish Aggarwal and M/s Racing Promotions Pvt. Ltd by granting a permanent injunction. The judgment upholds the enforceability of trademark rights in sports event branding and addresses issues of infringement, jurisdiction, and profits.

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.