The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Himalaya Global Holdings, restraining the defendants from infringing on the “Liv.52” trademark and using deceptively similar packaging. The court also appointed local commissioners to seize infringing products and gather evidence at the defendants’ premises. Continue Reading “Liv-52 versus Liv-40.” In the game of Trademarks you “Liv” or you die!
Glaxo Group Limited secured a legal victory in a trade dress dispute against Qpharm Health Care Limited. The Delhi High Court restrained Qpharm from using deceptively similar packaging and ordered the removal of infringing listings from third-party websites, protecting Glaxo’s established trademarks. Continue Reading Similarity Overdose : Glaxo’s trade dress vs Qpharm’s trade dress
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
Recent trademark rulings by the Delhi and Bombay High Courts address infringement and damages in cases involving ‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’, and ‘Raashee’ trademarks. Continue Reading ‘Sri Sharanam Ayyappa’, ‘Dengue Don’ , and ‘Raashee’, Trademark Case Decisions
Avtar Singh & Ors. v. Sakshi Srivastava & Anr.
There were four Plaintiffs in this case, i.e., Mr. Avtar Singh, Mr. Harkirat Singh, Aero Traders Private Ltd. and Aero Associates Pvt. Ltd., who co-owned M/s Aero Club. They filed an application for the trademark “WOODS” in the club’s name firstly in 1994 and 1996 under Class 25 and in 2017 under Class 3. The Plaintiffs together subsequently registered trademarks “WOODLAND”, “WOODLAND” (stylised) and other “WOODLAND” marks on varying dates in…
FACTS OF THE CASE
In this case, Cipla Limited, the Respondent/Plaintiff, filed a suit for permanent injunction before the Madras High Court. The suit was against Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, the Applicant/Defendant, as it infringed the Respondent/Plaintiff’s copyright and registered trademarks as follows:
The Applicant/Defendant imitated and substantially reproduced the artistic packaging, trade dress and labels of the Respondent/Plaintiff’s ‘BUDECORT RESPULES’ and ‘DUOLIN RESPULES’ which amounted to infringement of their copyright in artistic works. These were Budeonide Nebuliser Suspension BP,…
This post was first published on December 22, 2011.
In a very recent decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Radico Khaitan (decided on 20th December, 2011), a division bench revisited the ever debated question of trademark rights in numbers. A quick glance over the facts reveals that Radico has been the registered proprietor of the trademark '8 PM' for whiskey and other liquor. In February, 2011, Carlsberg launched Beer under the mark…