interim injunction | Intellepedia

Copyright Lives On, Even Before Probate

In the case of Dev Sahitya Kutir Pvt Ltd v. Smt. Archana Debnath & Anr., the dispute arose from alleged publication and sale of copyrighted literary and artistic works of a deceased author after expiry of an earlier publishing arrangement. The publisher argued that the suit could not proceed because probate had not yet been granted and because an earlier suit had already been dismissed for default, but the court rejected both objections at the interim stage.

KENT can’t do it! Court proves it’s not a big FAN of Kent’s Brand Stretch, backs prior use

In the case of Kent Ro Systems Limited v. Kent Cables Private Limited, two businesses using the same mark KENT clashed over who could sell fans under that mark. One side relied on its strong reputation in water purifiers and home appliances. The other relied on earlier adoption of KENT for electrical goods and evidence of fan sales over several years. The Division Bench upheld the interim restraint against Kent RO and left the final rights to be decided at trial.

First Owner of Copyright in Film Music: Delhi HC in Saregama v Ilaiyaraja

Film reel and musical notes illustrating film music rights.

Section 17(b) and 17(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957 was applied by the Delhi High Court to treat the producer as the first owner of copyright in film works, absent an agreement to the contrary. Interim restraint was granted against unauthorised licensing of the works.

Why Canva’s “Present and Record” Feature Is Still Restricted in India?

Illustration of a woman using Canva on a laptop with a lock featuring the Indian flag over the screen and the headline “Canva’s Missing Feature in India!”, symbolizing the Present and Record feature being blocked in India.

Why Canva’s “Present and Record” feature is still restricted in India and how the interim injunction in the RxPrism patent dispute continues to operate.

Same Hair, Same Care, Same Jasmine: Too Familiar for Trade Mark and Copyright Comfort

In the case of Marico Limited vs Minolta Natural Care, the court examined whether the defendants’ Jasmine and Hair Protection hair oil products unlawfully copied the distinctive trade dress, logos, and packaging of the plaintiff’s well known Jasmine and Hair and Care hair oil products sold under the Parachute house mark, and granted interim relief to the plaintiff.

“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.

UNPLUG YOURSELF Allowed, BOULT Logos Still Blocked

In the case of Exotic Mile vs Imagine Marketing Pvt Ltd, the court considered claims of trademark infringement and passing off in relation to competing marks used for audio devices. It limited interim relief to the scope of the pleadings and clarified the legal position on unpleaded claims.

Dr Reddy’s Semaglutide Exports to Continue as Court Denies Interim Relief to Novo Nordisk

Semaglutide injection pen with syringe surrounded by weighing scale, tape measure, dumbbell and fast food, symbolising weight loss and diabetes treatment.

The Delhi High Court refused Novo Nordisk interim relief against Dr Reddy’s, finding that the Semaglutide species patent faces serious validity challenges in light of the earlier genus patent. The Court allowed Dr Reddy’s to continue manufacturing Semaglutide in India solely for export to non-patent jurisdictions, with no domestic sales.

Frimline v. K-SMATCO: Delhi HC Rules Firmly in Pharmaceutical Patent Infringement Case

Prescription medicine bottles and tablets placed on a courtroom bench, symbolizing a pharmaceutical patent dispute and legal ruling.

In Frimline v. K-SMATCO, Delhi HC granted interim relief over patent IN 382949, citing strong prima facie infringement of Frimline’s pharmaceutical formulation.

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.