‘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”
infringement
Delhi High Court restrains Ashirvad Pipes from using marks similar to Jaguar’s ‘ARTIZE’ and ‘TIAARA’ marks in relation to sanitaryware
Defendant earlier using the mark “Ashirvad by Aliaxis” and adopting “ARTISTRY” only after plaintiff’s “ARTIZE” mark gained repute, prima facie, shows that there is a conscious attempt to ride on plaintiff’s reputation.
Delhi High Court declares ‘HALDIRAM’ as “well-known mark” in respect of food items, restaurants, eateries
After considering the inventory of the infringing products and the conduct of defendants, the Court decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff for Rs 50 lakh on account of damages and Rs 2 lakh are awarded as costs.
Delhi High Court restrains use of mark ‘Wow Punjabi’ being identical/deceptively similar to mark ‘Wow! Momo’
Plaintiff, Wow Momo made out prima facie case for grant of ex parte ad interim injunction and balance of convenience also lies in favour of plaintiff.
[Typo-squatting] Delhi HC restrains P. Rajesh Ram from using GOOCLE, GOOGLE, GIPAY, GEOGLE marks in a trade mark infringement plea by Google LLC
The present case is a classic example of typo-squatting, which relies on mistakes or typos made by internet users at the time of entering a website address/URL on the web browser and is bound to create confusion in the minds of the consumers.
Delhi High Court directs blocking of website, mobile application using ‘IKEA’ mark to mislead people to invest money
It is alleged that Defendants 1 and 2 are perpetrating fraud on the public by creating a false association with plaintiff, resulting in grave financial losses to the public.
Delhi High Court upholds Dolma Aunty Momos trademark; Cancels infringing trademark registration
The ruling sets a precedent for protecting established brands and upholding the integrity of trademark registration processes. The cancellation of the infringing trademark serves as a deterrent to potential trademark violators, emphasizing the importance of respecting intellectual property rights in commercial activities.
[RALEIGH v. RALLEYZ] Delhi High Court grants interim injunction to Swiss Bike Vertriebs for mark ‘RALEIGH’ in relation to bicycles
“Defendant’s mark ‘RALLEYZ’ is constituted in such a manner so as to phonetically sit remarkably close, if not together, and squeezed with, plaintiffs’ mark ‘RALEIGH’. It is clearly in the core zone of deceptive similarity, likely to cause confusion and likely to have an association with plaintiff’s mark.”
‘Not a case of innocent adoption’; Delhi High Court rules in favour of Hero Investcorp for mark ‘HERO’ in relation to engine oil
“The findings of the reports of the Local Commissioners also clearly indicate that defendants are actively involved in the sale, distribution, and manufacturing of counterfeit HERO Oil, thereby infringing upon plaintiffs’ registered HERO marks.”
‘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’.”
Look-alike products undermine integrity of fair trade; Obligation upon e-commerce platforms to ensure that sellers’ complete details are available: Delhi HC
“Irreparable harm will be caused if injunction is not granted, as on online platforms and marketplaces, it is extremely easy for sellers to proliferate the images and continue to dupe customers.”
‘Deliberate practice of trade mark squatting’; Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction to Volans Uptown LLC for its mark ‘Botanic Hearth’
“Registration of identical trade mark, specifically targeting the same class of goods raises a significant concern for potential confusion and deception among the public.”
Product-by-process claims must be examined on the anvil of a new and unobvious product: Delhi High Court
“There is an imperative necessity to balance the inventor’s interest and secure public interest and thus ensure that the claim does not travel beyond the invention itself.”
Delhi High Court restrains usage of mark ‘RAASHEE’ in relation to pan masala in a trademark infringement suit by ‘RAJSHREE’; imposes Rs 50,000 as costs
“Defendant is free to use the two proposed marks, i.e., 
and 
, so long as the said marks are used in a manner where the words ‘MY’ or ‘मेरी’ are of the same font, colour and size as the word ‘RAASHEE’.”
Delhi High Court dismisses plea to grant injunction to Lotus Herbals for mark ‘Lotus’ against Deepika Padukone’s brand ‘Lotus Splash’
“The products are completely dissimilar in appearance with a wide difference in the prices of the products. A consumer who uses such products would be aware of the difference between ‘Lotus Splash’ and plaintiff’s lotus family of products.”
Delhi High Court upholds registration of mark ‘Premier League’ in favour of Football Association Premier League Ltd.
“‘PREMIER’ as used in appellant’s mark is of a completely different font and style and has a small flower device on top of the word. Thus, concluded that there is no deceptive similarity on a bare perusal of the marks.”
‘Attempt to indulge in smart copying’; Delhi HC restrains Hermes Distillery from selling liquor under label ‘PEACE MAKER’ in suit by Allied Blenders and Distillers
“The differences showed that extraordinary effort has been put by defendant in identifying differences and the broad similarities are so obvious at the first look that the differences are nudged into oblivion.”
‘Similar to mark GK HAIR’; Delhi High Court restrains use of mark ‘GK WELLNESS’ for hair care products in infringement suit by company Van Tibolli
“Refusal of injunction will be contrary to public interest, as there will be likelihood of confusion, in the public, between the products of defendants and plaintiffs because of similarity of the marks used by them.”
Delhi High Court grants ad interim injunction in favour of Mannat Group of Hotels for its mark ‘MANNAT’
The MANNAT DHABA and MANNAT logo has been registered by the Mannat Group of Hotels Private Limited for their Dhabas and eateries, located at Murthal on the Delhi-Chandigarh Highway.
‘Does not constitute infringement of trade mark’; Delhi HC sets aside order restraining Booking.com from using ‘MakeMyTrip’ as keyword on Google Ads Program
“Use of trade marks as keywords cannot, by any stretch, be construed as applying the registered trade mark to any material intended to be used for labelling or packing goods, as a business paper, or for advertising goods or services.”