House of Diagnostics LLP Vs Pathology Labs

"Protecting Intellectual Property": Reflecting the court's commitment to safeguarding registered trademarks.

⦁ Plaintiff: House of Diagnostics LLP, owner of the registered trademark "HOUSE OF DIAGNOSTICS/H.O.D" for diagnostic services.

⦁ Defendant: House of Pathology Labs Private Limited, alleged to be infringing the plaintiff's mark by using "HOUSE OF PATHOLOGY/H.O.P" for similar services.

The Delhi High Court ordered the plaintiff to effect advance service of the suit on the defendant and provides proof thereof to be placed on record. The court emphasized the importance of complying with Rule 22 of the IPD Rules, which requires advance service of suit papers on the defendant. The plaintiff's application for exemption from advance service was not granted, as the court found no justification for dispensing with this requirement.

Advance Service :

The court stressed the significance of advance service in ensuring a fair hearing and preventing potential errors in uncontested orders.

Exemption :

Exemption from advance service is only granted in exceptional cases where irreparable injury would result from such service.

Trademark Infringement :

The case highlights the importance of protecting registered trademarks in the diagnostic services industry.