3,988 results found

In one of the first decisions pronounced after a full trial of a patent infringement suit related to ICT domain, the Delhi High court upheld that Philips's Patent IN184753 was a valid standard essential patent in respect of DVD playback technology and was infringed by the Defendants.

For the first time in the history of enforcement of non-Standard Essential Patents in India, the Delhi High Court has directed the Defendants/Infringers to make deposits in Court, or in the alternative, be subject to an order of injunction.

Last year, on October 2017, in the case of Saregama India Ltd Vs. Eros Digital FZ LLC & ANR1., pertaining to infringement of Copyright, the Delhi High Court stated that since it has no territorial jurisdiction...

In July, 2021, the Hon'ble Chief Justice of Delhi High Court announced creation of Intellectual Property Division to deal with IP matters including those which were to be transferred to the Delhi High Court from erstwhile Appellate Board.

In Ferid Allani v Union of India And Ors, the Delhi High Court directed the Indian patent office to reassess the Petitioner's patent application in light of the Court's observations on patentability of computer related inventions.

The appeal in Ram Krishan and Sons Charitable Trust Ltd. v. IILM Business School [FAO(OS) 331/2007 and CM Nos.8434/08, 1136/08, 4200-01/08, 4214-15/08, 15020/07 and 11857-58/07] was instituted against the order of the learned Single Judge, holding, inter alia, that because of concealment and deliberate misstatement of material facts, Ram Krishan and sons were required to be non-suited and that they had no equity in their favour, hence being disentitled to discretionary relief.

Trademark litigation, is more often than not centered around the premise of "deceptive similarity". The aspect becomes more debatable where an argument regarding generic usage or public knowledge of the mark be raised.

India is one of the largest suppliers of low cost generic medicines in the world.

S.K. Industries instituted a suit (“S.K. Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Rite Foods Product (P) Ltd”. 2008 (38) PTC 200 (Del.)) praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining Rite Foods Product (P) Ltd. and Ors. from infringing their design of Duck jars.

The inordinate delay in dispensation of justice has led to development of alternate methods for dispute resolution. The concept of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has introduced a non adversarial mechanism of dispute resolution. It facilitates parties to deal with the underlying issues in dispute in a more cost-effective manner and with increased objectivity.

Little did the international luxury goods brand Montblanc realize that its limited-edition pens featuring Mahatma Gandhi would be an invitation to a legal storm for it. Win your customer's heart and...

Parakh had instituted an infringement and passing off suit against Baroma Agro Product (Baroma) for the latter's use of the mark "MALABAR GOLD" in relation to biryani rice.

The procedural aspects of any suit are as important as the substantive side and amid that, to assert on the subject of the competent jurisdiction of the court has always been controversial. The instant judgment in the First Appeal from Order in Dharampal Premchand Ltd versus Golden Tobacco Products 2007 (34) PTC 633 (Del.) (DB) discusses the territorial jurisdiction in a composite suit for infringement of trademark, copyright and passing off.

The WIPO forum is proving to be an effective means for trademark owners to assert and claim their rights over infringing domain names.

Aspects such as Fashion, where a dedicated statute does not exist, and where aspects from different legislations may be drawn in, often find parties battling the applicability of these to their case.

The case, Khoday Distilleries Limited v. Scotch Whisky Association & Ors2008 (36) PTC 315 (Mad.) (DB), is the result of an appeal filed under Sec. 109 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 against the order of the learned Single Judge in T.M.A No.3 of 1989; and also the order passed by the learned deputy Registrar of Trade Marks allowing the Rectification application No. MAS-300 which directed the removal of the Registered Trade Mark No. 273203 of the appellant consisting of the words ‘PE

The disputes surrounding pharmaceutical product names or companies are not new to India. Of late, Cadila in a row against three companies using similar names was decided against in an infringement matter.

In the much talked about suit "Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. v. Harinder Kohli and Ors." [IA No.9600/2008 in CS(OS) 1607/2008] Warner Bros. to Delhi High Court to seek an interim injunction on the use of the title “HARI PUTTAR”.