Search Results for "trademark dispute"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Hears Appeals Against Madras High Court’s Setting Aside of Alien...
Supreme Court Hears Appeals on Permanent Establishment of Formula One World Cham...

Search Results for "trademark dispute"

156 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 156 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Suit — Petrofer Chemie and Hardcastle Petrofer v. United Petrofer Limited. Use of identical mark 'PETROFER' by defendant for similar industrial chemicals constitutes prima facie infringement under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

6 Nov 2025

The plaintiffs, Petrofer Chemie H.R. Fischer GMBH & Co. KG (a German company) and Hardcastle Petrofer Private Limited (an Indian company), filed a com...

High Court

C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.205 of 2023

12 Mar 2025

The plaintiff, VGN Projects Estates Private Limited, filed commercial suit no.205 of 2023 against the defendants, M/s. VGK Builders Pvt. Ltd. and M/s....

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction to Plaintiff in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Case. The court restrained the defendant from using deceptively similar 'PRINCE' and crown device marks for PVC pipes, finding a strong prima facie case of infringement and passing off.

6 Dec 2024

The plaintiff, Prince Pipes and Fittings Ltd., a Mumbai-based company, has been using the mark 'PRINCE' and a 'crown device' since 1987 for manufactur...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Trademark Infringement Case — No Deceptive Similarity Between STIMULIV and STIMULET for Different Pharmaceutical Products. The court held that the mark 'STIMULET' used for an allopathic breast cancer drug does not infringe the registered mark 'STIMULIV' used for Ayurvedic liver medicines due to differences in nature, trade channels, and customers under Section 29(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

20 Jan 2023

The case involves a trademark infringement and passing off dispute between two pharmaceutical companies. The appellant, Corona Remedies Private Limite...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Design Infringement Case, Modifying Consent Decree Due to Typographical Error. The Court held that the High Court erred in dismissing the application under Sections 152 and 153 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as a misunderstanding between parties warranted correction of the Settlement Agreement to reflect the intended trademark 'FX-991ES PLUS'/'FX-991'.

4 Feb 2022

The dispute arose from a civil suit filed by the Respondent against the Appellant for design infringement and trademark violation regarding scientific...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Partnership Law Case on Maintainability of Suit by Unregistered Firm. The Court held that Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 does not bar a suit for declaration and injunction based on fraud and statutory rights, as it does not involve enforcement of contractual rights.

31 Jan 2022

The appeal arose from a suit filed by an unregistered partnership firm, Shiv Developers, seeking declaration and injunction to nullify a sale deed dat...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Passing Off Claim in Trademark Dispute Over 'Buckaroo' and 'Walkaroo' Marks. Plaintiff's failure to establish goodwill and reputation in India for its mark 'Buckaroo' leads to denial of interim injunction against defendant's use of 'Walkaroo'.

30 Jan 2020

The plaintiff, Kinjal Ramesh Savla, filed a commercial IP suit alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'Buckaroo' and related marks, as well...

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Permanent Injunction in Trademark Infringement Suit — Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Swisskem Healthcare & Anr. — 'PANDERM' and 'POLYDERM+' Held Deceptively Similar. The Court held that the marks are structurally and phonetically similar, and the Defendant's use is likely to cause confusion, especially in medicinal products where a high degree of care is expected.

2 Jul 2019

The Plaintiff, Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off against the Defendants, Swisskem Healthcare and ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction Against Trademark Infringement and Passing Off in Beer Product Dispute. Plaintiff's registered trademark 'HAYWARDS 5000' held to be deceptively similar to Defendant's 'COX 5001', warranting protection pending trial.

6 Feb 2014

The plaintiff, Sabmiller India Limited, filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction against the defendant, Jagpin Breweries Ltd., for infringing its r...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Plaintiff's Injunction Against Trademark Threat in 'HOKEY POKEY' Dispute. Prior Registration of Defendant's Mark Under Class 30 Prevents Passing Off Claim Despite Plaintiff's Subsequent Use.

1 Jul 2011

The plaintiff, Drums Food International Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit seeking a declaration that a cease and desist notice issued by the defendants, Euro Ic...

3 4 5 6 7

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)