BananaIP Counsels Logo

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Image accompanying blogpost on "Use of mark “NOVYA” for selling ‘Ghee’ amounts to passing off and infringement of the mark “NOVA”"

Use of mark “NOVYA” for selling ‘Ghee’ amounts to passing off and infringement of the mark “NOVA”

Delhi High Court recently ruled in favour of Sterling Agro Industries, protecting their “NOVA” trademark for dairy products from a deceptively similar mark “NOVYA” used by ASR Trading Company. The Court noted the similarity in marks and packaging, the abandoned trademark application by ASR, and their its to prove otherwise, leading to a permanent injunction and penalty against the defendant. Continue Reading Use of mark “NOVYA” for selling ‘Ghee’ amounts to passing off and infringement of the mark “NOVA”
March 11, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 106Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blog post on "Objections regarding insufficiency of disclosure in patent applications must be clear and unambiguous "

Objections regarding insufficiency of disclosure in patent applications must be clear and unambiguous

The Delhi High Court recently ruled that the Indian Patent Office (IPO) must clearly and unambiguously articulate objections to patent applications. This case involved Microsoft’s patent application for “Discovery of Secure Network Enclaves,” which was rejected by the IPO for lacking inventive step and violating disclosure requirements. The Court found the IPO’s objections to be ambiguous and procedurally irregular, thereby stressing on fair hearings and proper communication during the patent examination process. Continue Reading Objections regarding insufficiency of disclosure in…
March 8, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 82Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "PSITA is not omniscient, says Madras High Court. Overturns refusal order in favour of Microsoft. "

PSITA is not omniscient, says Madras High Court. Overturns refusal order in favour of Microsoft.

The Madras High Court has overturned a Patent Office decision that rejected Microsoft’s patent application for “Message Communication of Sensor and other Data.” The Court clarified that the “person skilled in the art” (PSITA) used to assess the inventive step is not omniscient and cannot be presumed to possess the inventive solution claimed in the patent. Continue Reading PSITA is not omniscient, says Madras High Court. Overturns refusal order in favour of Microsoft.
March 6, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 99Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks"

Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks

Kalyan Jewellers successfully defended its trademarks ‘Kalyan’ and ‘Kalyan Jewellers’ against cybersquatting through a recent Madras High Court ruling. The Court ordered the transfer of the infringing domain name “kalyanjewellers.com” to Kalyan Jewellers after the WIPO arbitration panel couldn’t decide on the case due to the requirement of proving bad faith. Continue Reading Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks
March 5, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 113Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions

Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions

Recent trademark cases include injunctions against ‘Fly Hi’ and ‘Timespro’ by the Delhi High Court, and a pivotal Bombay High Court decision on renewal notices for trademark removal. These cases highlight the courts’ proactive stance in protecting registered trademarks and ensuring proper procedural adherence for trademark renewal and removal, emphasizing the importance of timely legal action. Continue Reading Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions
March 1, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 78Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, Confirms the Bombay High Court"

Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, confirms the Bombay High Court.

The Bombay High Court recently ruled that the “prosecution history estoppel” principle applies to trademark cases. This means that statements made during the trademark registration process about similarities with other trademarks can be used against the applicant in future infringement lawsuits. The Court also emphasized the importance of disclosing all relevant information, including prosecution history, in trademark lawsuits. Continue Reading Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, confirms the Bombay High Court.
February 29, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 113Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?"

Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

This blog post discusses a recent court case in India concerning the validity of raising a trademark invalidity plea against an interim application under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act. The court ruled that a plea of invalidity can be raised not only in the written statement but also in other pleadings and submissions, including counter-affidavits to interim applications. Continue Reading Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?
February 29, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 100Views 0Like
Share

Read more