HIGH COURT FEBRUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Stories on Delhi Riots; Bar Association Elections; Fake Anti-Cancer Drug; NOVARTIS Trade Mark; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
injunction
HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Khadi’s Device Mark; Police Protection for Live-In Couples; Wonderchef’s Reputation; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Rohini Court injuncts counterfeiter from infringing Ghadi’s packaging and tagline ‘Pahle Istemal Karen Fir Viswash Karen’
The Court held that the defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending their claim for tagline “Hamesha Istemaal Kare or Kapde Me Chamak Paaye”; and there was no other compelling reason as to why the Ghadi’s claim should not be disposed of before recording of oral evidence vide a summary judgment.
‘Distributor contractually obliged to maintain favourable reflection & protect goodwill’; Bombay HC injuncts distributor from damaging Wonderchef’s reputation
The Court granted injunction in favour of Wonderchef while bearing in mind that free speech cannot be lightly proscribed, and commercial speech formed a part of it.
BHARAT GATE mark is deceptively similar to INDIA GATE; Delhi High Court restores injunction
The marks INDIA GATE and BHARAT GATE convey the same meaning and the difference in trade dress between the marks as visually depicted on the packages of the appellant’s and respondent’s products would not mitigate the confusion created by the infringement.
HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Neeraj Bawania’s Bail; Rupali Ganguli’s Defamation Case; Mahindra Trademark Dispute; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Delhi High Court upholds injunction granted in favour of FMI Limited in ‘INDI’ vs ‘INDEED’ Trademark Dispute
The lack of bona fide on the part of the defendant is also demonstrated from the fact that it has adopted an identical colour combination of ‘blue and white’, as used by the plaintiff. Pertinently, most of the measuring tapes of the defendant selling under different marks do not bear the ‘blue and white’ colour combination.
HIGH COURT JANUARY 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Stories on Kareena Kapoor’s Copyright Infringment; Ladki Bahin Scheme; Bhopal Gas Tragedy Cleanup; and more
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Read why Delhi HC issued injunction against Telugu Actor Manoj Manchu and media outlets in defamation case filed by Vinay Maheshwari
“The claims made by the Manoj Manchu not only have the effect of tarnishing the credibility of Vinay Maheshwari as a respectable member of society but may further encourage the other individuals and media platforms to spread the defamatory content further. It may lead to widespread public dissemination and lasting damage to his image.”
Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of New Balance Athletics against local shoe company for trademark infringement
The present suit seeks a permanent injunction against trademark infringement, passing off, and unfair competition arising from the sale of footwear featuring marks that are nearly identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s established N Device and 550 marks.
Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Yahoo Inc. against trademark infringement by ‘YAAHOO!’ Mouth Freshener
Yahoo Inc.’s investigation revealed that the defendant was producing a mouth freshener under the name “YAAHOO! Mouth Freshener.” that closely resembled the established trademark “YAHOO!”, leading to allegations of trademark infringement and passing off.
Delhi High Court grants interim injunction against T-Series from using “Aashiqui” title in their proposed film
The term “Aashiqui” does not describe the general category of goods or services (films) but instead functions as a distinctive brand identifier for the Aashiqui Franchise.
Delhi High Court grants interim injunction in favour of Jindal India Limited for infringement of its “JINDAL” marks
In January and June 2024, the Jindal India Limited discovered that the defendant, Rawalwasia Steel Plant Private Limited, had adopted a similar trademark “HINDJAL HISAR” for galvanized and black steel tubes and pipes.
Madras High Court stops re-release of Kamal Hassan starrer movie ‘GUNAA’ due to copyright infringement claims
Madras High Court said that the applicant has made out a prima-facie case for grant of ad-interim injunction as prayed for in this application
NCLT restrains Byju’s from utilising funds collected on second rights issue until disposal of mismanagement petition
The NCLT ordered the respondents to maintain the status quo regarding existing shareholders and their shareholding.
[ICC T20 World Cup 2024] Delhi High Court grants dynamic + injunction to protect broadcast rights of Star India
The Delhi High Court said that the dynamic nature of the digital landscape necessitates that court orders are not static but evolve in tandem with technological advancements and challenges posed by the virtual domain.
Delhi High Court grants ‘Dynamic+ Injunction’ in favour of Universal Studios to protect its copyrighted works
The Court found it fit to grant a Dynamic+ injunction to keep up with the hydra-headed nature of the infringement actions of the websites.
[SPARX v HRX] Delhi High Court refuses injunction against Hrithik Roshan’s XS Brands Consultancy for using mark ‘X’
Plaintiff’s X mark is derived from their ‘SPARX’ logo and has been used in a standalone form in relation to its footwear products sold under the ‘SPARX’ brand. Plaintiff’s grievance is against the defendants who started using defendants’ X mark, which was deceptively similar, for footwear as well, being identical goods.
‘Fair and Handsome’ v. ‘Glow and Handsome’; Calcutta HC rules in favour of Emami in Passing Off Dispute Against Hindustan Unilever
Unfair advantage through conscious adoption of a competitor’s mark leads to potential confusion and deception”
‘Right to use one’s name on one’s goods cannot be compromised’; Delhi HC denies injunction to Jindal Industries for mark ‘JINDAL’ against mark ‘RN JINDAL SS TUBES’
“The risk of having others bona fide using ‘JINDAL’ as a name for their products, and in the marks used on their products, is a risk that plaintiff consciously took, when it obtained registration of the mark ‘JINDAL’.”