Case LawActs & SectionsOpen the app
IP Intelligence

Search Indian IP Case Law

Judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts on patents, trade marks, copyright, designs and geographical indications — organised by Act and section, each with a link to the judgment on the court’s website.

Clear filters

12 results

for “Registered Trade Mark”

Trade Marks

Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 2020 SCC OnLine Del 454

The Direct Selling Guidelines, 2016, being advisory executive instructions without the force of law, cannot bind e-commerce platforms. Once goods bearing a registered trade mark have been put on the market with the proprietor's co…

E-commerceExhaustion Of RightsIntermediary LiabilityOnline Infringement
Other

Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf alias Jackie Shroff v. The Peppy Store & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 2024 SCC OnLine Del 3664

A celebrity's personality and publicity rights extend to protection against commercial exploitation of name, image, voice and mannerisms, including through an unlicensed artificial-intelligence chatbot or distorted video content; …

AI And DeepfakesFreedom Of SpeechParodyPersonality Rights
Trade Marks

Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma v. Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories

Supreme Court of India · AIR 1965 SC 980

An action for infringement of a registered trade mark is a statutory remedy in which the use of a deceptively similar mark is itself actionable regardless of get-up, packaging or intent to deceive, whereas an action for passing of…

Acquired DistinctivenessDeceptive SimilarityDescriptive MarksInfringement
Trade Marks

Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah & Anr.

Supreme Court of India · (2002) 3 SCC 65

A trading or business name, though not a registered trade mark, is protectable in a passing off action once it has acquired goodwill through use; the tort protects established business reputation rather than the name itself, and n…

GoodwillInterim InjunctionPassing OffPersonal Name Marks
Trade Marks

Ruston & Hornsby Ltd. v. Zamindara Engineering Co.

Supreme Court of India · AIR 1970 SC 1649

Where the essential or dominant feature of a defendant's mark is deceptively similar to a registered trade mark, the addition of a descriptive, geographical or laudatory word does not by itself cure the infringement; for marks tha…

Composite MarksDeceptive SimilarityDominant MarkInfringement
Trade Marks

S. Syed Mohideen v. P. Sulochana Bai

Supreme Court of India · (2016) 2 SCC 683

Under the scheme of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the rights of a prior user of a trade mark are superior to the rights flowing from registration, and the statutory remedy of passing off under Section 27(2) remains available to a pri…

Deceptive SimilarityGoodwillPassing OffPrior User
Geographical Indications

Scotch Whisky Association & Anr. v. Pravara Sahakari Shakar Karkhana Ltd.

Bombay High Court · AIR 1992 Bom 294

Reputation and goodwill in a geographical class name vest collectively in the genuine producers of that class of goods, entitling any of them to restrain, by a passing off action, a trader who uses get-up, imagery or descriptive w…

Deceptive SimilarityExtended Passing OffGeographical IndicationPassing Off
Trade Marks

Snapdeal Private Limited v. GoDaddy.com LLC & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 2022 SCC OnLine Del 2044

A domain name registrar that sources alternative domain names from a common registry through an automated algorithm is an intermediary under Section 2(1)(w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000; merely making such domain names …

CybersquattingDomain NamesIntermediary LiabilityOnline Infringement
Trade Marks

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Finecure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi High Court · FAO(OS) (COMM) 200/2023, CM APPL. 47338-47340/2023

Mere delay in approaching the Court is not, by itself, sufficient to refuse an injunction, particularly in the pharmaceutical field where confusion between similar marks may also affect public interest.

Deceptive SimilarityDelayInterim InjunctionPANTOCID
Trade Marks

Tata Sons Ltd. v. Greenpeace International & Anr.

Delhi High Court · (2011) 45 PTC 275 (Del)

Use of a registered trade mark in a non-commercial context, for the purpose of parody, satire or criticism of the proprietor's conduct, does not amount to infringement or dilution under Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, …

Comparative AdvertisingDilutionFreedom Of SpeechParody
Page 1 of 2Next