Trademark Infringement | Intellepedia

Use of e-Rickshaw Trademark ‘Yatri’ by Competitor Restrained

The Delhi High Court has issued an injunction restraining the use of the “YATRI” trademark and images by a competitor in the e-rickshaw industry. The decision addresses concerns of trademark infringement and consumer confusion, with further hearings set for January 2025.

Nandini Deluxe v. Hotel Nandini: Court holds that both can continue using their trademarks

The Bengaluru court held that both Nandhini Deluxe and Hotel Nandini can continue using their trademarks as the word Nandini was found to be generic. Neither party proved exclusive rights or trademark infringement, resulting in dismissal of both claims.

VIVO sticks strong against VIVO adhesives, rewarded with well-known trademark status in India

The Delhi High Court declared VIVO a well-known trademark in India after finding infringement and passing off by an adhesive manufacturer. The Court issued a permanent injunction and set out legal criteria for determining well-known status and trademark protection under Indian law.

VANS obtains injunction against Trademark infringement under John Doe principles

The Delhi District Court granted VANS a permanent injunction against trademark infringement and counterfeiting by Mr. Gopal Goyal under the John Doe principles. The judgment emphasises the protection of trademark rights and the consequences of passing off in India.

Ensure Diabetes Care’s Advertisement Disparages Horlicks Diabetes Plus, says the Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has restrained the circulation of Ensure Diabetes Care’s advertisement for disparaging Horlicks Diabetes Plus. The ruling addresses the limits of comparative advertising and highlights key principles concerning disparagement and intellectual property rights in India.

Good Karma prevails for Upakarma yet again, court affirms injunction against Trademark infringement

The Delhi High Court affirmed an interim injunction against Rasayanam for using packaging deceptively similar to Upakarma’s registered trademark for Shilajit. The Court reiterated that overall trade dress similarity can lead to consumer confusion, justifying continued restraint at the interim stage.

Pharma company’s buttery slip : Court Stops Trademark Infringement of ‘AMUL’

The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained Bio Logic from using the AMUL trademark on pharmaceutical products, recognising deliberate infringement and consumer confusion. Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers secured damages and an order for destruction of infringing goods.

“Liv-52 versus Liv-40.” In the game of Trademarks you “Liv” or you die!

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favour of Himalaya, finding AB Allcare’s use of Liv-40 and similar trade dress to be deceptively similar to Liv.52. This case highlights critical aspects of trademark and trade dress protection in India.

Court Bans infringers from infringing “RAY-BAN”

The Delhi Court restrained Iswar Opticals and others from using marks deceptively similar to Ray-Ban, upholding Luxottica’s trademark rights. The judgment underscores the legal framework protecting famous marks against counterfeiting and passing off in India.

Fake Headsets? Not on Samsung’s Watch: Court Issues Permanent Injunction

The Delhi District Court granted a permanent injunction to Samsung against sellers of counterfeit headsets for trademark infringement and passing off. The judgment underscores the legal remedies available for brand protection in India.