Indian trademark law | Intellepedia

Dead Company Dead Mark: Trademark cannot survive a Non Existent Owner or unrecorded trademark assignment

Gravestone in a green field engraved with “Here lies a trademark that died when the company died,” symbolizing a struck-off company and the legal issue of an unrecorded trademark assignment in trademark law.

In the case of Tibbs Food Private Limited vs D Lite Frankies and Foods Private Limited, the petitioner sought removal of a trademark registered for “D Lite Frankies and Foods Private Limited.” During the proceedings it came to light that the registered proprietor company had already been struck off, and the trademark had allegedly been assigned to an individual years earlier. The court had to decide whether the registration could continue in the name of a non existent company and what effect the unrecorded assignment would have.

Descriptiveness and Registrability of Composite Marks in Cancellation Proceedings

Scattered jigsaw puzzles with few puzzles with the words 'STORE', 'MY' and 'GOODS' and the images of a red house.

This post analyses a Delhi High Court decision on the registrability of composite marks in trademark cancellation proceedings. It underscores the importance of assessing marks as a whole and the evidentiary role of continuous use in such disputes.

The Bounce Trademark Dispute: Generic Marks in Salon Services

Salon mirror reflection with hair styling tools and lights.

The Bounce trademark dispute highlights the complexities of enforcing rights over generic marks in the salon industry. The Madras High Court’s interim order underscores the importance of trial evidence in determining exclusivity and infringement in descriptive trademark cases.

Order of the Rose: Sets Olfactory Trademark Standards

This note summarizes the Trade Marks Registry’s ‘Order of the Rose’ on registration of an olfactory trademark in India for rose-scented tyres. It explains the objections, the IIIT Allahabad graphical model and the Registrar’s reasoning on distinctiveness under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Can trademark rights exist even without continuous commercial use?

Illustration of a digital tachometer with a needle pointing to 8,000 RPM, overlaid on a blue circuit board background with flowing neon lines representing speed and technology.

Delhi Court bars use of “X1” and “X1 Racing League” over trademark infringement, upholding plaintiff’s statutory rights despite non-use.

Court cancels 75-Year-Old TRIUMPH Trademark for Non-Use in Favor of Triumph Motorcycles

A red Triumph motorcycle parked on a scenic road with a backdrop of green fields, forest, and majestic mountain ranges under a bright blue sky with scattered clouds.

In the case of Triumph Designs Limited v. Tube Investments of India and Anr., the Calcutta High Court addressed two critical issues: whether the petitioner was a person aggrieved under Section 47 of the Trademarks Act, and whether the TRIUMPH mark had been unused for a statutory period justifying its cancellation.

Injunction in V3 Trademark Dispute Denied Over Unclean Hands

Image of two pair of hands folding clothes and garments on a table.

The Bombay High Court refused interim relief in the V3 trademark dispute, finding both parties had suppressed facts and acted inconsistently. The decision underscores that equitable remedies require parties to come with clean hands.

Sweet victory and Sweeter rewards – court declares NUTELLA well-known Trademark

Delhi HC grants Ferrero ₹30 lakh in damages, declaring ‘NUTELLA’ a well-known trademark in a major counterfeit case against M.B. Enterprises.

Epifi Outspeeds F1 Trademark in Court – No Use, No Rights!

Two cars racing side-by-side toward a checkered finish line with a waving finish flag; one car with FI MONEY written on it leads as it speed past the car with F1 on it.

The Delhi High Court cancelled the F1 trademark held by Formula One in Class 36 for non-use in India, following Epifi’s rectification petition. The decision reaffirms that trademark rights require genuine and ongoing use.

Trademark Licensing vs. Assignment: Madras HC on ROYALCHEF Dispute

The Madras High Court ruled that the licensing of the ROYALCHEF trademark does not restrict the licensor’s rights. In a dispute between Quality Chef Agro Foods and ADF Trading, the Court analyzed trademark ownership, assignment, and licensing agreements. It concluded that the plaintiffs, as licensees, had no exclusive right to the mark and could not prevent the licensor from exporting goods under the same brand.