BananaIP Counsels Logo

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Image accompanying blogpost on "Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks"

Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks

Kalyan Jewellers successfully defended its trademarks ‘Kalyan’ and ‘Kalyan Jewellers’ against cybersquatting through a recent Madras High Court ruling. The Court ordered the transfer of the infringing domain name “kalyanjewellers.com” to Kalyan Jewellers after the WIPO arbitration panel couldn’t decide on the case due to the requirement of proving bad faith. Continue Reading Injunction against use of Kalyan and Kalyan Jewellers Trademarks
March 5, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 786Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions

Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions

Recent trademark cases include injunctions against ‘Fly Hi’ and ‘Timespro’ by the Delhi High Court, and a pivotal Bombay High Court decision on renewal notices for trademark removal. These cases highlight the courts’ proactive stance in protecting registered trademarks and ensuring proper procedural adherence for trademark renewal and removal, emphasizing the importance of timely legal action. Continue Reading Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions
March 1, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 662Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, Confirms the Bombay High Court"

Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, confirms the Bombay High Court.

The Bombay High Court recently ruled that the “prosecution history estoppel” principle applies to trademark cases. This means that statements made during the trademark registration process about similarities with other trademarks can be used against the applicant in future infringement lawsuits. The Court also emphasized the importance of disclosing all relevant information, including prosecution history, in trademark lawsuits. Continue Reading Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, confirms the Bombay High Court.
February 29, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 705Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?"

Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

This blog post discusses a recent court case in India concerning the validity of raising a trademark invalidity plea against an interim application under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act. The court ruled that a plea of invalidity can be raised not only in the written statement but also in other pleadings and submissions, including counter-affidavits to interim applications. Continue Reading Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?
February 29, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 421Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks

Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks

Exploring recent judgments from the Delhi, Calcutta, and Madras High Courts on trademark disputes involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet vs. Nikoda Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’, and understanding the courts’ approach to trademark protection. Continue Reading Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks
February 28, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 489Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark"

Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark

In this case, the Madras High Court highlights the importance of addressing similarity concerns and pursuing registration as a label mark for stronger protection. This case with help gain insights for navigating trademark challenges in India. Continue Reading Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark
February 27, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 593Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Patanjali for Education, Kenley for Water Bottles, and Head Racer Trade Dress enforcement.

Patanjali for Education, Kenley for Water Bottles, and Head Racer Trade Dress enforcement

Recent trademark cases include the Delhi High Court’s decisions on a composite logo including ‘Patanjali’, Coca Cola’s ‘Kinley’ trade dress, and ‘Ball Head Racer’ packaging infringement. Continue Reading Patanjali for Education, Kenley for Water Bottles, and Head Racer Trade Dress enforcement
February 26, 2024 Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 507Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court."

Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.

“Chand” textile trademark owner loses infringement case against “Chand-A” lungi brand. Court finds long, honest, concurrent use by defendant since 1952 prevents confusion. Lack of concrete evidence weakens plaintiff’s claim of permissive use. Court outlines principles for proving honest and concurrent trademark use. Continue Reading Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.
February 19, 2024 Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 876Views 0Like
Share

Read more

Connect with Us

BananaIP Counsels

No.40, 3rd Main Road, JC Industrial Estate, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore – 560 111 (Old – 560 062)

Telephone: +91-76250 93758 |  +91-80-49536207 | +91-80-26860414/24/34
Email: contact@bananaip.com

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes
BananaIP Counsels

BananaIP has been acknowledged as a women-owned enterprise, certified by WEConnect International.

WeConnect International certifies BananaIP as a Woman-Owned Firm

Connect with us

BananaIP Counsels

Office Address

No.40, 3rd Main Road,  JC Industrial Estate, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore – 560 111 (Old – 560 062).

Telephone: +91-76250 93758 | +91-80-49536207 | +91-80-26860414/24/34

Email: contact@bananaip.com

© 2004-2024 BananaIP Counsels. All Rights Reserved.