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

41 results

for “Registration”

Trade Marks

N.R. Dongre & Ors. v. Whirlpool Corporation & Anr.

Supreme Court of India · (1996) 5 SCC 714

A passing off action does not depend on registration of the mark in the country where protection is sought, and the goodwill necessary to sustain such an action may be established through transborder reputation built up by adverti…

GoodwillInterim InjunctionPassing OffTransborder Reputation
Trade Marks

Nandhini Deluxe v. Karnataka Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.

Supreme Court of India · (2018) 9 SCC 183

Registration in a particular class of goods does not confer a monopoly over the entire class; likelihood of confusion under Section 11 must be assessed by the real nature and target consumers of the competing goods, and honest, lo…

ClassificationDeceptive SimilarityDissimilar GoodsHonest Concurrent Use
Designs

NEC Corporation & Ors. v. The Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.

Calcutta High Court · 2026:CHC-OS:71

A graphical user interface is not per se excluded from registration as a design under Sections 2(a) and 2(d) of the Designs Act, 2000; the requirement that a design be applied to an article by an industrial process must be constru…

Copyright Design OverlapDesign RegistrationDigital PlatformsNovelty
Trade Marks

Neon Laboratories Ltd. v. Medical Technologies Ltd. & Ors.

Supreme Court of India · (2016) 2 SCC 672

Under Section 34 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, actual continuous prior use of a mark in the market prevails over a rival's earlier-dated application for registration where the registrant remained inactive for a prolonged period; t…

Deceptive SimilarityNon-usePassing OffPrior User
Trade Marks

New Balance Athletics Inc. v. Astormueller AG and Ors.

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 962/2025

Registration of a mark is no defence to a passing off action, since rights under Section 27(2) are independent of and override the bar in Section 28(3) on one registered proprietor suing another for infringement. Registration mere…

Anti-Dissection RuleDeceptive SimilarityInitial Interest ConfusionPassing Off
Copyright

Opella Healthcare Group v. Pureca Laboratories Pvt Ltd (Copyright)

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 552/2024 & I.A. 32616/2024 (arising from I.A. 4622/2025)

A defendant cannot defend a copyright infringement suit on the basis of a registration that has been cancelled by an unchallenged rectification order which found the artistic work to be a copy of the plaintiff's pre-existing get-u…

Artistic WorkColourable ImitationCopyright RectificationLabel Design
Trade Marks

Opella Healthcare Group v. Pureca Laboratories Pvt Ltd (Trade Marks)

Delhi High Court · CS(COMM) 552/2024 & I.A. 32616/2024 (arising out of I.A. 4622/2025)

Where a coordinate bench, following an unchallenged rectification order, has found the mark in question deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered mark, the defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the infri…

Deceptive SimilarityPassing OffPharmaceutical MarksPrior Use
Trade Marks

Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. v. The Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Delhi High Court · LPA 316/2026 & CM APPL. 27819-20/2026

Where two parties file competing applications for registration of an identical or deceptively similar trade mark on a proposed-to-be-used basis, priority for registration under Section 18 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 is determined…

Approbation and ReprobationPrior RegistrationPriorityProposed to be Used
Designs

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. v. Wyeth Ltd.

Delhi High Court · 2013 SCC OnLine Del 4761

Prior publication of a design under Section 4(b) of the Designs Act, 2000 requires that the design, as applied to a specific article, be disclosed to the public with sufficient visual clarity to enable a person to perceive its sha…

CancellationDesign RegistrationNoveltyPrior Publication
Trade Marks

Renaissance Hotel Holdings Inc. v. B. Vijaya Sai & Ors.

Supreme Court of India · 2022 SCC OnLine SC 61

Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act applies only to marks used on dissimilar goods or services and cannot be invoked where the defendant's goods or services are identical to those of the registered proprietor, which instead falls…

Deceptive SimilarityDilutionSection 29(4)Trademark Infringement
PreviousPage 3 of 5Next