- AI
- Air Pollution
- Arbitration
- Asia
- Automobile
- Bangladesh
- Banking
- Biodiversity
- Biological Inventions
- bLAWgathon
- Brand Valuation
- Business
- Celebrity Rights
- Company Act
- Company Law
- Competition Law
- Constitutional Law
- Consumer Law
- Consumer Protection Authority
- Copyright
- Copyright Infringement
- Copyright Litigation
- Corporate Law
- Counterfeiting
- Covid
- Cybersquatting
- Design
- Digital Media
- Digital Right Management
- Dispute
- Educational Conferences/ Seminar
- Environment Law Practice
- ESIC Act
- EX-Parte
- Farmer Right
- Fashion Law
- FDI
- FERs
- Foreign filing license
- Foreign Law
- Gaming Industry
- GDPR
- Geographical Indication (GI)
- GIg Economy
- Hi Tech Patent Commercialisation
- Hi Tech Patent Litigation
- IBC
- India
- Indonesia
- Intellectual Property
- Intellectual Property Protection
- IP Commercialization
- IP Licensing
- IP Litigation
- IP Practice in India
- IPAB
- IPAB Decisions
- IT Act
- IVF technique
- Judiciary
- Khadi Industries
- labour Law
- Legal Case
- Legal Issues
- Lex Causae
- Licensing
- Live-in relationships
- Lok Sabha Bill
- Marriage Act
- Maternity Benefit Act
- Media & Entertainment Law
- Mediation Act
- Member of Parliament
- Mergers & Acquisition
- Myanmar
- NCLT
- NEPAL
- News & Updates
- Non-Disclosure Agreement
- Online Gaming
- Patent Act
- Patent Commercialisation
- Patent Fess
- Patent Filing
- patent infringement
- Patent Licensing
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Marketing
- Patent Opposition
- Patent Rule Amendment
- Patents
- Personality rights
- pharma
- Pharma- biotech- Patent Commercialisation
- Pharma/Biotech Patent Litigations
- Pollution
- Posh Act
- Protection of SMEs
- RERA
- Sarfaesi Act
- Section 3(D)
- Signapore
- Social Media
- Sports Law
- Stamp Duty
- Stock Exchange
- Surrogacy in India
- TAX
- Technology
- Telecom Law
- Telecommunications
- Thailand
- Trademark
- Trademark Infringement
- Trademark Litigation
- Trademark Registration in Foreign
- Traditional Knowledge
- UAE
- Uncategorized
- USPTO
- Vietnam
- WIPO
- Women Empower
Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘Nikind’ Mark from Trade Marks Register for being Deceptively Similar to ‘Nimekind’ Mark
Introduction In the case of Mankind Pharma Limited v. Arvind Kumar and Anr.[1], the Delhi High Court directed the removal of the ‘Nikind’ mark from the trade marks registry, for being identical and deceptively similar to the mark ‘Nimekind’ owned by the Indian pharmaceutical & healthcare company, Mankind Pharma Limited. The Petitioner was engaged in … Continue reading Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘Nikind’ Mark from Trade Marks Register for being Deceptively Similar to ‘Nimekind’ Mark
Read more »LT Foods Limited v. Saraswati Trading Company [2022 SCC OnLine Del 3694]
LT Foods, a leading food manufacturing and processing company known for its rice products, including for its popular brands Daawat, Daawat Devaya, Daawat Bestow and Chef’s Secret, filed a suit against the Defendant, Saraswati Trading Company, for trademark infringement. In August 2021, the Plaintiff discovered the Defendant’s activities of selling, storing, and distributing counterfeit “Daawat” … Continue reading LT Foods Limited v. Saraswati Trading Company [2022 SCC OnLine Del 3694]
Read more »The High Court of Delhi Grants Permanent Injunction in Favour of Louis Vuitton
Introduction The High Court of Delhi (“the Court”) on 18th April 2023, in Louis Vuitton Malletier vs Santosh & Ors.[1], issued a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from infringing and selling counterfeit products under the Plaintiff’s luxury brand “Louis Vuitton”. The Court also ordered the Defendants to pay INR 9.59 Lakhs as damages and costs … Continue reading The High Court of Delhi Grants Permanent Injunction in Favour of Louis Vuitton
Read more »Dabur vs. Dhruv Rathee
Introduction Dabur claimed that Dhruv Rathee’s video unfairly compared carbonated drinks with ready-to-serve (RTS) fruit beverages, causing a generic disparagement of all packaged drinking fruit juices. Dabur also alleged that the video specifically targeted its Real fruit juices by using partially blurred Real logos and promotional advertising clips. The court recognized that while dissemination of … Continue reading Dabur vs. Dhruv Rathee
Read more »RPG Enterprises Limited v Riju Ghoshal Trading As RPG
Introduction The plaintiff company is an Indian industrial group with over twenty years of business. The adoption of its trademark RPG originates from the company’s founder and well-known industrialist Mr. Rama Prasad Goenka. Over the years, RPG and the companies in its group have adopted a number of stylized/descriptive trademarks, including the mark RPG, to … Continue reading RPG Enterprises Limited v Riju Ghoshal Trading As RPG
Read more »Winzo vs. Google
Introduction Industries are implementing measures to sell their own products and improve client appeal as a result of rising worldwide competition. They occasionally have a tendency to promote their goods during this process at the risk of dishonouring or delegitimizing the product of their competitor. As a result, trademark law claims of “disparagement” are frequently … Continue reading Winzo vs. Google
Read more »Toyota vs. Jidosha Kabushiki
Introduction Toyota claimed to have launched its product- a minivan, under the name Alphard in 2002, stating that they have been using it in China, Russia, Indonesia, Philippines and Japan. In India, Toyota has filed an application to register the mark on a “proposed to be used” basis, under class 12 (Vehicles; apparatus for locomotion … Continue reading Toyota vs. Jidosha Kabushiki
Read more »Sun Pharma vs. Hetero Healthcare
Introduction Under Class 5 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, Sun Pharma has registered the mark “LETROZ,” which refers to a medication used to treat advanced breast cancer. “LETROZOLE” is one of its active ingredients. Sun Pharma sued Hetero Healthcare Ltd. for using the mark “LETERO” on the basis of trademark infringement and passing off. … Continue reading Sun Pharma vs. Hetero Healthcare
Read more »Milaap Social Ventures India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Google India Pvt. Ltd.
Introduction The plaintiff filed a lawsuit for an injunction to stop the defendants and respondents from using the trademark “MILAAP” illegally. The petitioners/plaintiffs in the lawsuit assert that they registered a trademark application for the registration of their mark after incorporating their office in Singapore and then in India. According to the plaint, the petitioners … Continue reading Milaap Social Ventures India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Google India Pvt. Ltd.
Read more »Case Analysis: Pandrol Limited & Anr. v. Patil Rail Infrastructure Pvt.
Introduction The Plaintiff no.1 is the industry leader in rail fastenings and track elasticity solutions headquartered in the United Kingdom. The plaintiff no.2 is a joint venture between the plaintiff no.1 and Rahee Industries Ltd. The defendant no.1 is a company in the business of dealing in railway track engineering. Defendants no.2 to 5 are … Continue reading Case Analysis: Pandrol Limited & Anr. v. Patil Rail Infrastructure Pvt.
Read more »