PATEL FIELD MARSHAL AGENCIES AND ANR.versusP.M. DIESELS LTD. AND ANR.
2017 INSC 115729 November 2017Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the trademark "Field Marshal" where the plaintiff sought injunction against the defendants for alleged infringement. The defendants challenged the validity of the plaintiff's trademark and filed rectification applications under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The key…
M/S. PARAGON RUBBER INDUSTRIESversusM/S. PRAGATHI RUBBER MILLS & ORS.
2013 INSC 79829 November 2013Dismissed
The plaintiff, Paragon Rubber Industries, filed a suit in the District Court of Kottayam seeking relief under the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The defendants challenged the suit's territorial jurisdiction, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction under the 1958 Act. The trial cou…
LAL BABU PRIYADARSHIversusAMRITPAL SINGH
2015 INSC 103627 October 2015Dismissed
The appellant sought registration of the word "RAMAYAN" with a crown device for incense sticks, which the respondent opposed on the ground that the term is the title of a Hindu holy book. The Assistant Registrar dismissed the opposition, but the Intellectual Property Appellate Board set aside that order, prompting the …
M/S. NANDHINI DELUXEversusM/S. KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LTD.
2018 INSC 64226 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation (respondent) had been using the mark ‘NANDINI’ for milk and milk products since 1985, while the restaurant chain M/s. Nandhini Deluxe (appellant) began using the mark ‘NANDHINI’ for its restaurants in 1989 and later applied for registration of the mark for various foo…
RASIKLAL MANICKCHAND DHARIWAL & ANR.versusM/S. M.S.S. FOOD PRODUCTS
2011 INSC 82025 November 2011Dismissed
The plaintiff, M.S.S. Food Products, sued the appellants for passing off, seeking a declaration and injunction over the use of the mark "Manikchand". The trial court granted an interim ex parte injunction, later proceeded ex parte after the defendants failed to appear, closed their right to cross‑examine, heard only th…
D.A.V. BOYS SR. SEC. SCHOOL ETC. ETC.versusDAV COLLEGE MANAGING COMMITIEE
2010 INSC 42423 July 2010Dismissed
The DAV College Managing Committee, holder of a registered trademark for "DAV" and "Dayanand Anglo Vedic", filed four suits in the Delhi District Court under Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 against several schools in Chennai that were using the same mark. The Chennai schools filed transfer petitions under Sect…
CANARA BANKversusN. G. SUBBARAYA SETTY & ANR.
2018 INSC 38520 April 2018Appeal(s) allowed
Canara Bank granted a loan to N.G. Subbaraya Setty, who signed an unregistered assignment deed transferring the trademark "Eenadu" to the bank as security. The bank later cancelled the deed, invoking the Banking Regulation Act, and both parties litigated in 2004 – the bank seeking to declare the deed void and the respo…
JAGATJIT INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusTHE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY APPELLACE BOARD & ORS.
2016 INSC 7420 January 2016Dismissed
Jagatjit Industries Ltd. applied for registration of the mark “Blenders Pride” in India. Respondent No.4, a US‑based liquor company, opposed the application, claiming prior rights and seeking an extension of time to file its opposition. The Registrar issued a show‑cause notice under s.57(4) to delete the mark, but late…
RENAISSANCE HOTEL HOLDINGS INC.versusB. VIJAYA SAI AND OTHERS
2022 INSC 7019 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Renaissance Hotel Holdings Inc., a US company, holds a registered trademark "RENAISSANCE" for hotel‑related services and goods in Classes 16 and 42. The respondents operated hotels under the name "SAI RENAISSANCE" in Bangalore and Puttaparthi, prompting the plaintiff to seek a permanent injunction. The trial court gran…
TOYOTO JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHAversusMIS PRIUS AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS.
2017 INSC 123014 December 2017Dismissed
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha, a Japanese automobile manufacturer, sued M/s Prius Auto Industries and partners in Delhi High Court for infringement of its registered marks (Toyota, Toyota Innova, Toyota Device) and for passing off of the unregistered mark 'Prius'. The trial judge granted a permanent injunction agains…
PERNOD RICARD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANOTHERversusKARANVEER SINGH CHHABRA
2025 INSC 98114 August 2025Dismissed
Pernod Ricard India Private Ltd. and a related entity own the registered trademarks BLENDERS PRIDE, IMPERIAL BLUE and SEAGRAM'S for premium whiskies. They sought an interim injunction to stop Karanveer Singh Chhabra from using the mark LONDON PRIDE, alleging infringement and passing off. The Commercial Court and the Ma…
ASIAN PAINTS LIMITEDversusRAM BABU & ANOTHER
2025 INSC 82814 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed
Asian Paints Ltd., a paint manufacturer, discovered that counterfeit paints bearing its brand were being sold by Ram Babu. The company, through a power of attorney, engaged an IPR consultancy to investigate and the investigation led to an FIR under the IPC and Copyright Act. The trial court convicted Ram Babu, but the …
PARAKH VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusBAROMA AGRO PRODUCT AND OTHERS
2018 INSC 60212 July 2018Dismissed
Parakh Vanijya Private Ltd, the registered owner of the label mark “MALABAR” for Biryani Rice in Class‑30, sued Baroma Agro Product for infringement and passing off, alleging that the respondent’s use of “BAROMA MALABAR GOLD” was identical or deceptively similar. The High Court, noting that the registration of “MALABAR…
INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD.versusJUPITER INFOSYS LTD. AND ANR.
2010 INSC 7629 November 2010Case Partly allowed
Infosys Technologies Ltd. owned the trademark "Infosys" in classes 7, 9 and 16. Jupiter Infosys Ltd., later renamed Jupiter International Ltd., filed applications under Sections 46 and 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 seeking removal/rectification of those marks on the ground of non‑use and other defects…
K. MANGAYARKARASI & ANR.versusN.J. SUNDARESAN & ANR.
2025 INSC 6879 May 2025Dismissed
The petitioners filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction and damages for alleged infringement of the trademark ‘SRI ANGANNAN BIRIYANI HOTEL’. The respondents filed a Section 8 application invoking arbitration clauses in two assignment deeds of the trademark, alleging that the deeds were fraudulently executed. The Co…
NEON LABORATORIES LTD.versusMEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LTD. & ORS.
2015 INSC 7285 October 2015Dismissed
Neon Laboratories Ltd (appellant) sought to enforce its trademark ROFOL, for which it had applied in 1992 and obtained registration in 2001, but only began using the mark in 2004. Medical Technologies Ltd and its associate (respondents) had been using the similar mark PROFOL since 1998, having acquired goodwill in the …
SURESH DHANUKAversusSUNLTA MOHAPATRA
2011 INSC 8312 December 2011Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Suresh Dhanuka, and respondent, Sunita Mahapatra, entered into a joint‑venture and a deed of assignment whereby the respondent assigned 50% of her rights in the trademark "Naturoma Herbal" to the appellant, with a covenant that the mark be marketed solely by the appellant and that neither party could use…
DR. ALOYS WOBBEN & ANR.versusYOGESH MEHRA & ORS.
2014 INSC 4162 June 2014Disposed off
Dr. Aloys Wobben, holder of several wind‑turbine patents, sued Yogesh Mehra and others for patent infringement in the Delhi High Court. The respondents filed revocation petitions before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board under s.64(1) of the Patents Act and also raised counter‑claims in the infringement suits se…
INDIAN PERFORMING RIGHTS SOCIETY LTD.versusSANJAY DALIA&ANR.
2015 INSC 4521 July 2015Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined whether sections 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 allow a plaintiff to sue in a district court where it resides or carries on business even when the cause of action has also arisen at its principal place of business. The Court held that these provisions creat…