“Where an infringer copies the registered trademark as well as the registered product design, packaging and trade dress, the Court may grant immediate injunction and appoint a Local Commissioner to preserve and seize the infringing material.” Court: High Court of Delhi Case No.: CS(COMM) 733/2024 Date: 29 August 2024 Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee Area of Law: Trademark Infringement, Passing Off, Registered Design Infringement, Copyright and Trade Dress Short Des

“A defendant cannot escape trademark infringement merely by making minor changes to the wording when the overall mark, packaging and artistic presentation create the same commercial impression.” Court: Delhi High Court Case No.: CS(COMM) 656/2023 Citation: 2024:DHC:8953 Date of Decision: 8 November 2024 Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal Short Description About the Case This was an important trademark, copyright and passing-off dispute concerning the well-known confection

“Similarity in the mark, packaging and overall trade presentation can collectively establish a strong case of trademark infringement and passing off.” Court: Delhi High Court Case No.: CS(COMM) 17/2024 Date: 4 March 2024 Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula Short Description About the Case The plaintiff, Wings Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd., was engaged in the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products and was using the mark “जूँ नाशक / JU NASHAK” in respect of an anti-lic

“An online marketplace cannot permit sellers to exploit genuine product listings for selling counterfeit goods; effective brand-gating measures are necessary to protect trademark owners and consumers.” Court: Delhi High Court Case No.: CS(COMM) 803/2024 Decision: 18 September 2024 Citation: 2024:DHC:7283 Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal Short Description About the Case This is an important trademark infringement case concerning the sale of counterfeit products through a

A significant trademark infringement case concerning deceptive phonetic and visual similarity between “RALEIGH” and “RALLEYZ”, along with imitation of bicycle trade dress. Delhi High Court CS(COMM) 25/2023 & I.A. 827/2023 Citation : 2024:DHC:1884 Judgment dated : 4 March 2024 Short Description About the Case Swiss Bike Vertriebs GmbH, associated with the Accell Group and proprietor of the “RALEIGH” bicycle brand, approached the Delhi High Court against Reliance Brands Limited

“In a patent infringement action, the working and commercial exploitation of the patented invention, as well as proper documentary evidence, can become crucial to the plaintiff’s claim.” Court: Delhi High Court Case No.: CS(COMM) 247/2024 Judgment/Order: 5 November 2024 Citation: 2024:DHC:8764 Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal Short Description About the Case City Glass and Glazing Pvt. Ltd. instituted a commercial suit against Ozone Overseas Pvt. Ltd. alleging infringem

A trademark infringement and passing-off case concerning the protection of the well-known “VERIZON” mark against the deceptively similar “VRIZON” mark. Short Description About the Case Verizon Trademark Services LLC, proprietor of the internationally recognised “VERIZON” trademark, challenged the use of “VRIZON” by the defendants. The Delhi High Court examined the similarity between the marks, the reputation of the plaintiff's mark and the likelihood of confusion and deceptio

A significant pharmaceutical trademark case protecting the well-known “SANOFI” mark against the deceptively similar “ZANOFI” mark. Short Description About the Case Sanofi, proprietor of the registered “SANOFI” trademark, challenged the defendant's use of “ZANOFI” as both a corporate name and pharmaceutical trademark. The Delhi High Court found the marks structurally and phonetically similar and granted permanent protection to Sanofi against the defendant's use. Facts The plai

A significant trademark and trade-dress case concerning protection of distinctive product packaging and overall commercial appearance against imitation. Short Description About the Case Jaquar & Company Pvt. Ltd. approached the Delhi High Court alleging that Ashirvad Pipes Pvt. Ltd. had adopted elements of Jaquar's trademarks, packaging and overall trade dress in relation to sanitary and plumbing products. The dispute required the Court to examine the similarity of the compet

A significant pharmaceutical trademark case concerning deceptive similarity between “VIAGRA” and “VIGOURA”, trans-border reputation, infringement and passing off. Short Description About the Case Pfizer Products Inc. sought protection for its well-known “VIAGRA” trademark against the defendants' use of “VIGOURA” for homeopathic medicines relating to sexual disorders. The Delhi High Court held that the marks were deceptively similar and that the defendant's use amounted to tra

A significant trademark opposition case concerning delayed additional evidence and the strict adherence to prescribed procedural timelines. Short Description About the Case ITC Limited challenged the Registrar of Trade Marks' refusal to accept additional evidence in support of its opposition to a trademark application. The Delhi High Court examined the scope of Rule 53 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002, corresponding to Rule 48 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017, and emphasized that

A significant trademark and copyright case protecting the “DREAM11” brand against unauthorised websites, domain names and online misuse. Short Description About the Case Sporta Technologies, operator of the well-known fantasy sports platform “Dream11”, approached the Delhi High Court against unidentified defendants who were allegedly using the plaintiff's trademarks, copyright-protected content and domain names deceptively similar to DREAM11. The case demonstrates the protect

A significant trademark and passing-off case concerning deceptive similarity, overall impression, and the importance of comparing competing marks in their commercial context. Short Description About the Case The dispute concerned the trademarks “PIKNIK” and “PICNIC.” S.M. Dyechem alleged that Cadbury's use of “PICNIC” for confectionery products was deceptively similar to its “PIKNIK” mark. The Supreme Court examined the principles governing deceptive similarity and passing of

A significant trademark, copyright and passing-off case protecting established brand identity, trade dress and goodwill against a deceptively similar competing product. Short Description About the Case The case concerned the well-known whisky brands “IMPERIAL BLUE”, “IMPERIAL RED” and “ROYAL STAG” of Pernod Ricard and the defendant's use of “IMPERIAL GOLD.” The plaintiffs alleged trademark infringement, copyright infringement, passing off, dilution and unfair competition. The

A trademark passing-off case concerning “SURYA,” deceptive similarity, trade dress and the requirement of establishing likelihood of confusion. Short Description About the Case Gaurav Polymers was engaged in the manufacture and sale of white lime wash under the trademark “SURYA” and a Rising Sun device. The defendant used “SURYA MAGICAL WHITE.” The dispute involved trademark infringement, passing off and copyright claims. The Court examined whether the defendant's mark and pr

An early Supreme Court trademark authority establishing that deceptive similarity must be assessed from the perspective of an ordinary consumer and the overall impression of the competing marks. Short Description About the Case The case concerned competing Eagle/Vulture device marks used for sewing thread. James Chadwick & Bros. had an established Eagle Mark, while National Sewing Thread adopted a similar bird device and initially used the words “Eagle Brand,” later changing

A recent Supreme Court trademark case concerning deceptive similarity between “CHANDRIKA” and “CHANDRA” and protection of a registered trademark. Short Description About the Case Wipro Enterprises was the proprietor of the well-established “CHANDRIKA” trademark for soaps. Mariyas Soaps used the mark “CHANDRA.” The Supreme Court considered the similarity between the marks and the overall presentation of the products and ultimately restrained the respondent from using “CHANDRA.

A leading trademark case establishing the principle of honest concurrent use and the circumstances in which an identical trademark may be permitted to be registered. Short Description About the Case This case concerned the trademark “DUREX”. London Rubber Co. Ltd. opposed the registration of the same mark by Durex Products Inc., claiming prior use of DUREX in India. The Supreme Court examined whether an identical trademark could nevertheless be registered on the ground of hon

A significant trademark case establishing the importance of prior use and the distinction between registration and actual commercial use of a trademark. Short Description About the Case This case concerned the pharmaceutical marks “ROFOL” and “PROFOL.” Medical Technologies Ltd. claimed rights in the mark PROFOL, while Neon Laboratories Ltd. subsequently adopted and used ROFOL. The dispute required the Supreme Court to consider the effect of prior registration, subsequent use,

A landmark trademark case establishing the test of deceptive similarity from the perspective of an average consumer with imperfect recollection. Short Description About the Case This case concerned the trademarks “AMRITDHARA” and “LAKSHMANDHARA”, both used for medicinal preparations. Amritdhara Pharmacy opposed the registration of “Lakshmandhara”, arguing that the two marks were deceptively similar and likely to cause confusion. The Supreme Court examined how competing tradem