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.
65 results
for “Infringement”
Reliance Industries Limited v. Pawan Kumar Gupta & Ors.
In assessing the likelihood of confusion for interim relief, courts must apply a more stringent standard where the infringing goods are edible products sold through online marketplaces to unsophisticated consumers, since even mino…
Dynamic InjunctionOnline InfringementPassing OffTrade DressTrade MarksRenaissance Hotel Holdings Inc. v. B. Vijaya Sai & Ors.
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 InfringementTrade MarksRuston & Hornsby Ltd. v. Zamindara Engineering Co.
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 MarkInfringementTrade MarksS. Syed Mohideen v. P. Sulochana Bai
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 UserCopyrightSanjay Soya Pvt. Ltd. v. Narayani Trading Company
Copyright registration under the Copyright Act, 1957 is not mandatory to institute or maintain a suit for infringement; copyright subsists automatically in an original work upon its creation, and Sections 44, 45 and 48 merely crea…
Artistic WorkCopyright InfringementCopyright RegistrationEvidentiary PresumptionTrade MarksSatyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
A domain name has all the characteristics of a trade mark and is entitled to protection against passing off; the fact that the Trade Marks Act, 1999 does not specifically legislate on domain names does not exclude a domain name fr…
Deceptive SimilarityDomain NamesGoodwillOnline InfringementTrade MarksSnapdeal Private Limited v. GoDaddy.com LLC & Ors.
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 InfringementDesignsSteelbird Hi-Tech India Ltd. v. S.P.S. Gambhir & Ors.
An ex parte interim injunction restraining an alleged infringer of a registered design must be vacated where the defendant demonstrates a credible prima facie case that the design feature relied upon was already common to the trad…
CancellationDesign InfringementDesign RegistrationNoveltyTrade MarksSun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Finecure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors.
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 InjunctionPANTOCIDPatentsSyngenta Limited v. Controller of Patents and Designs
Under Section 16 of the Patents Act, a divisional application is maintainable where the plurality of inventions is disclosed in the provisional or complete specification accompanying the parent application, irrespective of whether…
Claim ConstructionDivisional ApplicationPatent ProsecutionPlurality Of Inventions