The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction in favour of Promodome Communication Private Limited, restraining the defendant from using identical marks and domain names. The decision highlights the Court’s handling of clear-cut trademark infringement and passing off matters.
Read more about Promodome Trademark Dispute: Ex-Parte Injunction GrantedTag: Trademark Dispute
Winning the Race for ‘X1’: A Trademark Dispute Resolved
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.
Read more about Winning the Race for ‘X1’: A Trademark Dispute ResolvedInterim Relief to FDC in KROMALITE Trademark Dispute
In a significant trademark ruling, the Delhi High Court sided with FDC Limited, granting interim injunction against Palsons Derma for using “CHROMALITE”, a mark found deceptively similar to FDC’s “KROMALITE”. The decision underscores brand integrity and affirms legal safeguards against consumer confusion in pharmaceutical and cosmetic sectors.
Read more about Interim Relief to FDC in KROMALITE Trademark DisputeManash Lifestyle’s “FACES” Trademark Secured in Court
Delhi High Court upholds FACES trademark, orders to remove deceptive ‘FACES BY SHABINA KUNDIAL’ mark registered under Class 44.
Read more about Manash Lifestyle’s “FACES” Trademark Secured in CourtNon Use of Trademark Leads to Cancellation: Delhi High Court favors Zepto
The Delhi High Court, in an ex-parte decision, ordered the removal of the ‘ZEPTO’ trademark registered by Mohammad Arshad in Class 35, upholding Kiranakart’s claim of non-use. The judgment affirms that trademarks must be actively used to retain validity under Section 47 of the Trade Marks Act.
Read more about Non Use of Trademark Leads to Cancellation: Delhi High Court favors ZeptoITC’s injunction against Arpita Agro upheld
The Delhi High Court upheld ITC’s injunction against Arpita Agro, restraining the company from using the trademark ‘POWRNYM.’ The Court ruled that the mark was deceptively similar to ITC’s ‘NIMYLE’ and ‘JOR-POWR,’ violating trademark rights. The judgment emphasized that contractual obligations and trade dress similarities must be strictly adhered to in trademark disputes.
Read more about ITC’s injunction against Arpita Agro upheldThe Battle for Respect continues: Sammaan Capital v. Svamaan Financial
The Delhi High Court addressed the appeals in the Sammaan Capital v. Svamaan Financial trademark dispute. The case involved phonetic similarity, consumer confusion, and corporate branding rights. The Court maintained the status quo, requiring disclaimers in advertisements and setting a final hearing for April 2025.
Read more about The Battle for Respect continues: Sammaan Capital v. Svamaan FinancialCounterfeit books sold on Amazon, Allahabad Law Agency obtains injunction
In Allahabad Law Agency v. Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., the Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction against online sellers distributing counterfeit copies of Law of Torts by Dr. R.K. Bangia. The Court found copyright and trademark infringement but declined to award damages, granting nominal costs of Rs. 15,000 to the Plaintiff.
Read more about Counterfeit books sold on Amazon, Allahabad Law Agency obtains injunctionTrademark 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.
Read more about Trademark Licensing vs. Assignment: Madras HC on ROYALCHEF Dispute‘Big Dipper’ trademark infringement case, ruling on transborder reputation and importers’ rights
The Delhi High Court ruled on a trademark dispute between ‘Big Dipper’ and ‘Big Deeper,’ setting aside an ex parte injunction. The case centered on the assertion of transborder reputation by importers of the ‘Big Dipper’ mark. The Court relied on precedent to determine that mere global reputation is insufficient to claim trademark protection in India. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
Read more about ‘Big Dipper’ trademark infringement case, ruling on transborder reputation and importers’ rights