Trademark Infringement | Intellepedia

Trademark Win: Swatch Group’s careful watch leads to Permanent Injunction

The Patiala House Courts granted a permanent injunction to Swatch Group against traders using its trademarks on counterfeit watches. The decision highlights the enforcement of trademark rights and the legal remedies available for brand owners in India.

ADIDAS kicks up a storm, wins 5 lakhs in Trademark infringement case

Adidas AG obtained a favorable judgment in a Delhi court trademark infringement case, resulting in a permanent injunction and damages. The defendant was found selling counterfeit products using Adidas’s registered marks, leading to a court-ordered destruction of such goods.

ITC obtains injunction against former owners of NIMYLE and JOR-POWR Trademarks

The Delhi High Court granted ITC an interim injunction restraining Arpita Agro from using the mark POWRNYM, finding it deceptively similar to ITC’s NIMYLE and JOR-POWR trademarks. This case highlights the importance of respecting trademark rights and contractual obligations in the Indian legal context.

COCOMELON spells a ‘Melon’cholic end for Copycat Competitors

The Delhi High Court cancelled a deceptively similar trademark registration for COCOMELON, reinforcing protections for well-known marks. The judgment highlights that substantial similarity and bad faith can lead to trademark cancellation in India.

Polo rides to the finish line in trademark infringement dispute

The Delhi District Court decided in favour of Polo in a trademark infringement and passing off dispute against Landmark Traders and Mystic Emin Private Ltd. The judgment clarifies key legal standards for assessing similarity and confusion in Indian trademark 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.

Brokering peace? “Nobroker” says NO to “NotBroker”

This post analyses a recent Indian court decision where Nobroker secured a permanent injunction against Notbroker for trademark infringement and passing off. The judgment highlights key legal principles governing brand protection and domain name disputes within the real estate sector.

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.

Court directs cancellation of “STAR” Trademark for lack of honest and concurrent use

The Madras High Court cancelled the STAR trademark held by S Star Trading Co., recognising the Petitioner’s prior use and distinctiveness. The Court found the Respondent’s adoption of the mark dishonest and likely to cause confusion, directing cancellation for lack of honest and concurrent use.

Real blow to infringers by L’Oreal, court issues injunction for Trademark infringement

L’Oreal secured a permanent injunction from the Delhi Commercial Court against the import of counterfeit cosmetics bearing its trademarks. The decision underscores the role of strong intellectual property enforcement in protecting global brands and market integrity in India.