Indian trademark law | Intellepedia

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.

Not everyone’s cup of coffee! Cothas Coffee sips a trademark victory

The Bengaluru Civil Court has permanently restrained former partners of Cothas Coffee from using the mark “COTHA” for coffee businesses, citing trademark infringement and lack of bona fide use. This judgment highlights the legal standards for trademark protection and passing off under Indian law.

Classic Fireworks’ Trademark goes up in smoke, Eagle wins over Garuda

The Madras High Court set aside the registration of the Garuda mark, citing a likelihood of confusion with SIECO’s prior Eagle trademark. The court found that the marks’ similarities could mislead consumers and rejected the defence of acquiescence.

Micky Metals runs out of “LUX”, Court issues injunction against using “LUX TMT” Trademark

The Calcutta High Court permanently restrained Micky Metals from using Lux TMT, finding it constituted passing off against the well-known Lux trademark. The judgment reinforces the legal protection of established trademarks in India.

“TATA COPPER+ WATER” Trademark Infringement Injuncted with Nominal Damages

The Delhi High Court issued a permanent injunction in favour of Tata Sons against trademark and trade dress infringement involving TATA COPPER+ WATER. The defendant, a first-time infringer, was ordered to pay nominal costs and destroy infringing goods as per the court’s structured approach.