Trademarks Archives

Lights out for “Everyday” Lighters : Injunction in favour of EVEREADY

The Delhi High Court has restrained KSC Industries from using the mark “Everyday” for lighters, finding it deceptively similar to Eveready’s well-known trademark for batteries and lighting products. Continue Reading Lights out for “Everyday” Lighters : Injunction in favour of EVEREADY

May 15, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 490Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

ITC Protects “Gold Flake” Brand: Court Halts Sale of Deceptively Similar Cigarettes

ITC Limited, the owner of the “Gold Flake” trademark for cigarettes, successfully obtained an injunction against competitors using confusingly similar brands like “Gold Falcon” and “Gold Flicker”. Continue Reading ITC Protects “Gold Flake” Brand: Court Halts Sale of Deceptively Similar Cigarettes

April 30, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 777Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Non-use of trademark is not a valid defense against injunction

A Taiwanese adhesive tape company successfully obtained an injunction against a competitor using “Reindeer” and “Reindeer Wonder” trademarks on PVC pipes. The Court found these marks deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s “Deer” brand and intended to mislead customers. Continue Reading Non-use of trademark is not a valid defense against injunction

April 29, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 723Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

No more ‘Social’izing for Social chai

The Delhi High Court has issued an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against a restaurant/café operating under the name of Social Chai. The Court held that the addition of the suffix “CHAI” to “SOCIAL” is insufficient to effectively differentiate the Defendant’s mark from that of the Plaintiff’s, especially due to the identical domain of restaurant services. Continue Reading No more ‘Social’izing for Social chai

April 26, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 467Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

In this infringement and passing off case filed by Sun Pharma against Glenmark, the Court was asked to determine if the trademark “INDAMET” infringes upon the trademark “ISTAMET XR CP”. Sun Pharma’s “ISTAMET XR CP” was registered in 2014 by its predecessor in title, and Glenmark’s trademark, INDAMET, was registered in 2021. Continue Reading Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

April 25, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 654Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

The dispute centers on the “PEBBLE” mark used by V Guard and Crompton. V Guard, adopting it in 2013 for electric water heaters, clashed with Crompton’s 2020 application for “CROMPTON PEBBLE” for electric irons. Delhi High Court’s injunction restrained Crompton from using “PEBBLE,” citing Trade Marks Act violations. The Court upheld V Guard’s reputation, dismissing Crompton’s appeal. Continue Reading Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

April 24, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 777Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court upheld the decision to refuse CEAT Limited’s trademark application for “FARMAX.” Citing significant delay and potential confusion with existing marks, the Court dismissed the appeal. The decision underscores the importance of timely action and highlights the necessity for distinctiveness in trademark applications. Learn more about the case: Ceat Limited vs The Registrar Of Trade Marks. Continue Reading Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

April 15, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 438Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

A battle of SMITHS. Who owns the rights over the word 'SMITH'?

A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

The Delhi High Court ruled in the case of A.O. Smith Corporation v. Star Smith Export Pvt. Ltd., dismissing the defendants’ plea in a trademark infringement dispute. The court upheld A.O. Smith’s claim, restraining the defendants from using marks ‘STAR SMITH’ and ‘BLUE DIAMOND,’ citing potential confusion and dishonest adoption. Continue Reading A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

April 10, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 496Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

In a landmark ruling, the Delhi High Court settled a decades-long dispute over the ownership of the ‘FIELDMARSHAL’ trademark. Confirming PM Diesel’s prior and legitimate usage since 1963, the court dismissed Thukral Mechanical Works’ claim based on a later acquisition. This judgment underscores the critical importance of prior user rights in trademark disputes. Continue Reading Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

April 5, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 513Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition.

The Delhi High Court while deciding an application for interim injunction, held that the defendants did not infringe the plaintiff’s registered trademarks or pass off its products as those of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff, instituted a civil suit, against Defendant 1, Suncity Sheets Pvt. Ltd. ("SSPL"), and Defendant 2, Rachna Nitin Jindal, wife of Nitin Kumar Jindal, Manager of SSPL, based on its rights over the word mark “JINDAL” registered in classes 6 and 17. The Plaintiff’s case was that the…

March 28, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 569Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Lights out for “Everyday” Lighters : Injunction in favour of EVEREADY

ITC Protects “Gold Flake” Brand: Court Halts Sale of Deceptively Similar Cigarettes

Non-use of trademark is not a valid defense against injunction

Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition.

Connect with Us

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

Connect with us