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.
40 results
for “Costs”
F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. & Anr. v. Cipla Ltd.
A patent claim for a chemical compound is not to be narrowed to a specific polymorphic or crystalline form merely because the specification discusses particular polymorphs, where the claim itself is drafted broadly to cover the co…
Claim ConstructionPatent InfringementPharmaceutical PatentPolymorphCopyrightGaurav Garg v. Aly Morani & Ors.
A plaintiff claiming copyright in an event must prove authorship and ownership; failing that, claims for credit, injunction and accounts fail.
AuthorshipAward ShowCopyright InfringementCreditCopyrightGramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey & Ors.
Infringing copies brought into India, even for transit to another country, are 'imported' within Section 53 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and may be prohibited after an enquiry.
Customs SeizureGoods in TransitImportInfringing CopiesTrade MarksHoly Cow Foundation v. Patanjali Gramodyog Nyas (Trust) & Ors.
A registration will not be removed from the Register unless a ground for rectification under the Act is established.
CancellationFloor CleanerGONYLERectificationCopyrightIndian Performing Right Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia & Anr.
Under Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act and Section 134(2) of the Trade Marks Act, a plaintiff that carries on business where the cause of action arose must sue at that place, and cannot invoke its principal office elsewhere to c…
Cause of ActionForum ShoppingPlace of BusinessTerritorial JurisdictionPatentsK.K. Bansal v. Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.
A patentee claiming damages for infringement of a standard-essential patent must prove infringement through evidence tested at trial and must prove that its royalty rate is FRAND, ordinarily through comparable licences; exhaustion…
DamagesFRANDPatent ExhaustionPatent InfringementTrade MarksKarnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd. v. Vinod Kanji Shah & Anr.
Even for different goods, an application may be refused on opposition where the applicant copies the distinctive style of writing of an established mark and the marks are phonetically similar, so that customers familiar with the e…
AgarbattisNANDINIOppositionRegistrar's Order Set AsideTrade MarksKirloskar Diesel Recon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Kirloskar Proprietary Ltd. & Ors.
A house mark and trade name with a long-standing reputation across a range of businesses, such as KIRLOSKAR, may be protected against its adoption as part of another's trade name, even where the goods or services differ.
Different GoodsHouse MarkInterim InjunctionKIRLOSKARTrade MarksLaboratoires Griffon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Rajiv Mukul & Ors.
For pharmaceutical products, marks that are phonetically and visually close are restrained at the interim stage because confusion can endanger public health; substantial costs may be imposed for adoption of a confusingly similar d…
CostsDeceptive SimilarityGLIMETGLYZETTrade MarksM/s Dhodha House v. S.K. Maingi
The additional forum in Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act cannot be used to found jurisdiction over a trade mark claim for which the court otherwise lacks territorial jurisdiction; whether a composite suit lies where the trade ma…
Carrying on BusinessComposite SuitTerritorial JurisdictionTrade Mark and Copyright