Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan AttorneysAn ISO 9001 / 27001 certified law firm

IPR News

Search From Date To Date
Trademark - No passing off for using mark SPLITVIEW


Observing that the elements of irreparable injury and balance of convenience were not satisfied, Delhi High Court on dated 4-7-2018 has rejected grant of an interim injunction in a case involving use of word SPLITVIEW in software products. In this case involving passing-off, it was observed that plaintiff was not entitled to interim injunction if they do not cl...

Pre-cut Eye Drape having only functional value does not qualify as Design


Considering nothing non-obvious, novel or unique in the shape, size, configuration, pattern and composition in registered design of Pre-Cut Eye Drape, Delhi High Court in its decision dated 28-5-2018 has held that the design does not qualify as design under Section 2(d) of the Designs Act. It noted that functional shape and configuration dictated solely by func...

Trademark – Section 124 applicable to stay infringement suit and not suit for passing-off

19th June, 2018

Observing that the defendant had never abandoned the plea of invalidity and had filed the rectification proceedings within three months before IPAB, Delhi High Court has stayed the suit for infringement of trademark, under Section 124 of the Trademarks Act, 1999.

 Reliance in this regard was placed upon Supreme Court’s recent deci...

No passing-off in abbreviation used along with another different mark

7 June, 2018

In a case involving passing-off by use of trademark VAC-PAC, Delhi High Court has dismissed the suit with costs. It observed that plaintiff used the mark with his another trademark SUPERON, while defendant used it along with his mark GMM/arc, which is totally different.

The High Court in Superon Schweisstechnik v. Modi Hitech observed ...

Trademark passing-off – Use of surname not prohibited

7 June, 2018

Karnataka High Court has upheld vacation of interim injunction in a case involving alleged passing-off in names of companies - Patil and Patil Parimala Works, and Patil Fragrances. The plaintiff had contended that by using the word ‘Patil’, the defendant was infringing the rights of the plaintiff.

The defendant however pleaded bona ...

Trademark/dress infringement – Punitive damages for violating interim order

2nd May 

Delhi High Court has held that selling of chocolates under name of Golden Passion amounts to passing off, unfair competition, etc. An order of permanent injunction was passed upholding defendant’s chocolates as deceptively similar to plaintiff’s registered trade mark or trade dress FERRERO ROCHER.

Further, observing that t...

Copyright – Lack of originality in work is touchstone in Rectification Petition

2nd May 

The Delhi High Court has allowed the rectification application holding that artistic work in label NIHAL UTTAM is not an original work under Section 13 of the Copyright Act. It held that Respondent’s artistic work in the said label was substantial reproduction and colourable imitation of Appellant’s NIHAR COCONUT OIL.

Copyright – ‘Protected system’ under I.T. Act, and ‘Government work’

2nd May

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that power of declaration of ‘protected system’ under Section 70 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 has to be read along with the provisions contained in Sections 2(k) and 17(d) of the Copyright Act, 1957 defining government work and vesting copyright in such work in the government.

Trademark – No confusion between words ‘Blacksmith’ and ‘Goldsmith’

2nd May

Finding no case of infringement and passing off of mark ‘Blacksmith’ by mark ‘Goldsmith’, Delhi High Court has dismissed the suit for permanent injunction. It noted that dictionary meanings of words were different and they were unlikely to be remembered by breaking into two parts, i.e. Black and Smith or Gold and Smith.

Patents - Counter claim in infringement suit better than revocation in IPAB

26th March

In a case involving revocation application before IPAB and infringement suit before the High Court, Delhi High Court has held that effect of taking defence under Section 107(1) of the Patents Act or of making a Counter claim under Section 64 would be same.

Observing that IPAB was not in position to grant relief as patent term had expired, ...

Patent infringement – Prior study having contrary findings is not ‘prior art’

26th March

The Delhi High Court has held that the combination containing both Metsulfuron Methyl and Sulfosulfuron as prepared by the plaintiff was novel and not obvious. The uniqueness of plaintiff’s composition comprising of such compounds was that it was effective against both grassy and broad leaf weeds.

Allowing the interim injun...

Trademark infringement – Identical manner of use important, while difference in packing not

23rd March 

In a case involving alleged infringement of trademark, Delhi High Court has held that difference if any in the cartons in which the goods may be sold or packed will not affect deception otherwise likely between the two marks.

Further observing that the manner in which the defendant was using its mark “VKG” was identic...

Page(s) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 
Please refer 'Archives' section to see older items.
Search People
Search People
Alphabetical by First Name
Enter at least a name or a keyword to search