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

IPR News

Search From Date To Date
Mere addition of suffix or prefix to a mark does not remove likelihood of confusion

27th November

The appellant was aggrieved by the order of permanent injunction passed in favour of respondent who runs fast food restaurant and was using the name ‘Adiga’, ‘Vasudev Adiga’ and various other combinations with ‘Adiga’.
The respondent was prior user of the unregistered trademark (since 1993) an...

Trademark infringement when products involved are different

In a case pertaining to a suit for trademark infringement and passing off, in the mark “Vogue”,  the trial court had vacated the ex-parte interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs(Advance Magazine Publishers Inc). The appeal against that was dismissed by the Delhi High Court.  The plaintiff was the owner of the mark “VOGUE” used i...

Copyrights - Sound recording rights different from literary or musical rights

A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court has dismissed the appeal filed against the Single Judge  Order granting an interim injunction, restraining the defendants (Trimurti Films Pvt. Ltd)  from releasing the film “Baadshaho” with the song “Keh Doon Tumhe”. Plaintiff(Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd) had filed a suit for copyright infrin...

Are Belated Claim Amendments of Granted Patents Permitted?

In a recent order dated August 01, 2017, the Singapore Court of Appeal [See end note i], upheld the High Court’s order [See end note ii] rejecting Warner-Lambert Company LLC’s (Warner-Lambert) application in a pending patent infringement suit against Novartis (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Novartis), seeking leave to amend its Patent for the drug &...

Trademarks – Phonetic similarity when word used as suffix in one mark and as prefix in another

4th September

Bombay High Court on 2-8-2017, in the case of Pidilite Industries Limited v. Poma-Ex Products, observed that there existed high degree of phonetic similarity between the mark of the plaintiff “FEVIKWIK” and the mark of the defendant “KWIKHEAL”. The Court issued an interim injunction in favour of the Plaintif...

Global injunction on display of search engine results

4th September

Google has on 24th of July brought an action before the US District Court (Northern District of California-San Jose Division) to prevent enforcement of the Canadian Supreme Court Order that prohibits Google from publishing within the US, search result information about the contents of the internet.

The Canadian Supreme Cour...

Copyright in literary work authored by director of company

4th September

The Delhi High Court on 4-8-2017, in the case of Neetu Singh v. Rajiv Saumitra granted an interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff. The suit was pertaining to copyright infringement in a literary work.

The defendant contended that the literary work was produced by the plaintiff during the course of her employmen...

Right to Privacy – Supreme Court’s landmark judgement

The Basics

How the reference came about?

- It was a reference from the Aadhar case.
- There was an apparent conflict between the judgments of the Supreme Court in MP Sharma case (8-judge bench) & Kharak Singh case (6 judge bench) on the one hand, versus more than 6-7 d...

Doctrine of equivalents & prosecution history - UK Supreme Court clarifies

24th July, 2017


The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has recently passed its judgment in the case of the Actavis Vs. Eli Lilly and Company , on 12th July, 2017. This judgment has very wide ramifications on some of the most critical principles of UK Patent Law. Apart from clarifying the applicability of the doct...

Examination of national phase patent application filed after specified period

24th July, 2017


In recent judgment of 10th July 2017, the Delhi High Court in the case of the Trytan Medical INC. vs. Union of India, has taken to task, the Patent Office, for its failure to adhere to the orders and direction of a Superior Court/ Tribunal. In this case the High Court has directed the Patent Office...

Trademarks – Effect of part of mark being generic and common to particular trade

21 June 2017

Observing differences, including differences in trade dress, label and get up of the two trade-names – ‘Pinch of Spice’ and ‘Pinch of Salt’, the Delhi High Court has on 24-05-2017 vacated the interim injunction it earlier granted in favour of the plaintiff. The marks were also found to be dis-similar phonetically...

Trademark infringement – Distinction in services provided, is material

21 June 2017

A Single Judge of the Delhi High Court has on 22-05-2017 vacated the earlier ex-parte interim injunction in a case involving trademark infringement where the mark “PINDROP” was used by the plaintiffs for recording studio business (class 41) and the mark “PINDROP MUSIC” was used by the defendants for an online applicati...

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