The question of interpretation of law to ensure that no miscarriage of justice ensues from the verdict has been up for consideration of the courts on many an occasion.

Trademark searches may have a bearing on deciding whether a registration for a mark be sought or not.

In Michael Casey Enterprises Ltd. & Ors v TVC Sky Shop, the controversy entailed the interplay of the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Designs Act, 2000. In this case Michael Casey Enterprises Ltd & Ors (Plaintiffs) filed a suit for permanent injunction seeking to restrain TVC Sky Shop (Defendant) from selling health and fitness equipment under the trademarks "PERFECT ABS" and "AB PRO PLUS" which were three dimensional reproduction of engineering drawings of the Plaintiff’s "AB KING PRO".

India, being a common law country, recognises the superior trademark rights through prior use against the statutory rights obtained through Registration. Relying on this, the Delhi High court has recently confirmed the preliminary injunction against Lupin in a suit for infringement and passing off filed by Sun Pharma.

In the recent past, the traditional conception of copyright has given way to rise of various complex matters to cope up with the advancements in the nature of works and the medium of their expressions that propose protection under the Copyright Law.

The revival of the Indian economy and globalization of markets have thrown open new opportunities in the field of foreign investments and a strong patent regime is a key driver for foreign investment in India, particularly when other competing countries in South East Asia, including China offer better investment climate.

A person is said to infringe a registered Trade Mark when he uses such registered Trade Mark as his trade name or part of his trade name or name of his business concern or part of the name of his business concern dealing in goods or services in respect of which the mark is registered. It is well settled principle of law that use of part of registered trade or phonetic similarity constitute infringement of trademark.

In the constant race for TV rating points, competitors often come at loggerheads as in a recent clash between two titans over a reality TV show.

With the extension of lockdown for another two weeks effective May 4, 2020, the Administrative and General Supervision Committee of High Court of Delhi...

In view of the spike in new cases of Covid-19, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has once again suspended limitation periods and timelines under all general and special laws.

In view of the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, the Supreme Court of India by an order dated March 27, 2020 extended the period of limitation prescribed under the general law or special laws ...

Bharat Matrimony Com. P. Ltd., a pioneer in providing matrimonial services, created a system; "Assured Contact Phone Verification Service", and was the owner and proprietor of the copyright in the system, inbuilt in their website.

Triable cause of action is undoubtedly an important consideration while filing a suit. Being a subject incorporated in Civil Procedure Code, 1908 the issue presented itself before the Delhi High Court in the case of "PVR Pictures Ltd v. Studio 18".

Jurisdiction is a primarily a subject matter covered under the Civil procedure Code, 1908. The issue however, came up for deliberation in Lark Laboratories Ltd vs Nabros Pharma Pvt Ltd 2010 (42) PTC 675 (Guj).

In continuation to the Bajaj-TVS Patent infringement dispute, with respect to the launch of “FLAME”, Bajaj moved to the Supreme Court vide SLP No(s).13933/2009 against the decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court that allowed the launch of Flame in the market.

In the case of "Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha (Petitioner) v Sunil Grover and Ors" (Respondents), Sunil Grover (Respondent No.1) sought for registration of the trademark "SHARP" in respect to "Television Boosters, two in one, television antenna and converters".

Patent Filing, Prosecution, and Enforcement in India

Delay and laches many-a-times lay the foundation for contending appeals. While the Indian law allows an appeal to be filed purely on legal grounds, devoid of facts and evidence, delay often is the only ground that is raised in deciding matters in an appeal.

On September 23, 2021, the Supreme Court withdrew the suspension of limitation that was in place since March 23, 2020, when COVID-19 pandemic gripped the country.

In India, trademark protection often requires courts to balance territorial legal principles with the realities of global reputation.