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.
106 results
for “Appeal”
Abhimanyu Prakash & Ors. v. Ferrero S.p.A. & Ors.
Seized infringing articles bearing an imitation of a protected trade dress should be destroyed rather than released for other use.
AppealCounterfeit GoodsDestruction of Seized GoodsJar ShapeTrade MarksADS Spirits Pvt. Ltd. v. The Registrar of Trade Marks
Section 9(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 proscribes registration only where a mark is devoid of distinctive character, that is, incapable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of another; it does not…
Absolute Grounds for RefusalArbitrary MarkDistinctivenessNon-speaking OrderPatentsAgriboard International LLC v. Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs
An order refusing a patent for lack of inventive step must contain a reasoned analysis of the prior art and of why the claimed invention would be obvious; an unreasoned order will be set aside and remanded.
Inventive StepPatent OfficePrior Art AnalysisReasoned OrderTrade MarksAmazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
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 InfringementTrade MarksAmerican Home Products Corporation v. Mac Laboratories Private Limited & Anr.
A proprietor may validly register a mark proposed to be used through a registered user, and such a registration is not liable to removal for non-use merely because the proprietor itself has not used the mark.
Foreign ProprietorNon-useProposed UseRectificationTrade MarksAmritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta
Deceptive similarity between trade marks must be assessed by comparing the marks as a whole for their overall phonetic, visual and structural resemblance, from the standpoint of a person of average intelligence and imperfect recol…
AcquiescenceDeceptive SimilarityHonest Concurrent UseImperfect RecollectionTrade MarksAshiana Ispat Limited v. Kamdhenu Limited & Ors.
A mere contractual promise to let someone adopt and use a mark is not the same as transferring ownership, where the contract makes ownership conditional on registration. Non-use of a mark for decades defeats a claim to common-law …
AssignmentDiscretionary OrderInterlocutory InjunctionLicencePatentsAstraZeneca AB & Anr. v. Intas Pharmaceuticals Limited
A patentee that has treated a later patent as coextensive in term with an earlier patent covering the same compound abroad cannot, at the interim stage, claim a longer period of protection for the later patent in India; interim re…
DapagliflozinEvergreeningGenus PatentInterim InjunctionCopyrightAzure Hospitality Private Limited v. Phonographic Performance Limited
Pending trial, a user of sound recordings may be permitted to continue use on paying the copyright owner at the tariff of a registered copyright society, instead of being injuncted, where the owner is not itself a registered copyr…
Copyright SocietyInterim Injunction ModifiedPublic PerformanceRMPLPatentsBajaj Auto Ltd. v. TVS Motor Company Ltd.
In trade mark, copyright and patent suits, the hearing should proceed on a day-to-day basis and the final judgment should normally be delivered within four months from the filing of the suit, rather than the litigation remaining a…
Case ManagementExpeditious TrialInterim InjunctionIP Suits