Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

Delhi High Court Cancels Registration in JBR Trademark Dispute

A dramatic legal-themed illustration showing the Delhi High Court in the background, a judge’s gavel striking down a circular “JBR” emblem stamped in red with “CANCELLED,” symbolising the cancellation of trademark registration amid a court dispute.

The registration of the JBR trademark was cancelled after identity of marks and similarity of goods were found under Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act. The Registrar’s order dismissing the opposition was set aside.

‘In Vitro Detection’ Still Diagnostic: Nematode Cancer Test Barred under Section 3(i)

Close-up of a dictionary page with the word “Diagnosis” highlighted in bright green by a chisel-tip highlighter, emphasizing the term against surrounding text.

In Hirotsu Bio Science v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court held that branding a process as “in vitro detection” does not rescue it from Section 3(i) when, in substance, it diagnoses cancer. The nematode-based urine test was thus refused as an excluded diagnostic method.

Same MAXO, New Spy: When a Mosquito Repellent Became a Camera and Trade Mark Law Stepped In

In the case of Jyothy Labs Limited vs Gautam Kumar, the court examined whether embedding spy cameras inside MAXO mosquito repellent machines and selling them online could be justified as resale, or whether such conduct crossed into trade mark infringement, trade dress misuse, and passing off.

You Can’t Live with Liv 333: When Trademark Similarity Turns Costly

In the case of Rajasthan Aushdhalaya Private Limited vs Himalaya Global Holdings Ltd, the Delhi High Court Division Bench examined an appeal against a final decree passed by a Single Judge in a trademark infringement suit. While affirming the injunction against the use of Liv 333, the Division Bench reiterated settled principles on trademark protection, dominant features, and infringement, and looked at the basis on which damages and costs were imposed.

If You List It, They Might Sue: Trademark Infringement, Place of Business, and Online Access

In the case of Kohinoor Seed Fields India Pvt Ltd vs Veda Seed Sciences Pvt Ltd, the Delhi High Court Division Bench provided a structured analysis of what constitutes territorial jurisdiction in trademark infringement actions after examining the plaintiff’s principal office, online listings, and the role of marketing agreements.

BLUE JAYS vs BLUE-JAY: Delhi HC on Bad Faith and Trans-Border Goodwill

Blue jay birds with apparel and baseball equipment

In Mr. Sumit Vijay & Anr. v. Major League Baseball Properties Inc. & Anr., the Delhi High Court clarified that global fame alone does not establish trademark rights in India. The ruling in BLUE JAYS vs BLUE-JAY underscores the need to prove use and goodwill within India to succeed in cancellation and passing off claims.

“Little Hearts”, Big Infringement: Delhi HC Injunction

Banner with the text “Little Hearts”, Big Infringement: Delhi High Court’s Ad-Interim Injunction Explained beside a coffee mug and scattered red heart-shaped biscuits.

An ad interim injunction was granted by the Delhi High Court in a dispute concerning the “Little Hearts” mark, 3D biscuit shape, trade dress and product images. Amazon was directed to delist the infringing listings pending further orders.

Inventive Step Misjudged? Delhi HC Revives Trident’s Patent Application

Composite image showing a close-up of breathable maroon fabric, a cartoon panel of judges giving thumbs up, and colorful yarn balls representing air-rich yarn innovation in a legal patent context

Delhi HC revives Trident’s patent application, citing flaws in the inventive step analysis of its air-rich yarn invention.

Are Employment Agreements sufficient for establishing Proof Of Right?

Close-up of an employment agreement document on a clipboard with a pen placed on top, surrounded by office supplies on a textured surface.

Delhi High Court rules employment agreements valid as proof of right under Section 7(2), aiding patent filings involving deceased inventors.

Unauthorized Commercial Use of Persona of Andhra Pradesh Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan: Delhi HC Intervenes

In the background of merchandise such as t-shirts, mugs, an overlay text stating 'Unauthorized Commercial Use of Persona of Andhra Pradesh Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan: Delhi HC Intervenes'

The Delhi High Court intervened to protect actor and Andhra Pradesh Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan’s personality and publicity rights from unauthorized commercial use, including AI-generated impersonations. The Court granted interim injunctions, emphasizing the enforceability of celebrity rights under Indian law.