IP Case Law › Acts & Sections › Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Select a provision to see the judgments in the database that turn on it.
Section 10 (1)Section 151 (2)Section 35 (2)Section 35A (1)Section Order II Rule 3 (1)Section Order VII Rule 11 (1)Section Order VIII Rule 10 (1)Section Order XIII-A (1)Section Order XXXIX Rule 1 (16)Section Order XXXIX Rule 2 (8)Section Order XXXIX Rule 2A (1)
Judgments citing this Act
Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi & Ors.
A celebrity's publicity rights in his name, image and persona may be enforced through an omnibus injunction that binds not only named defendants but extends to blocking directions against telecom and internet intermediaries, where…
Domain NamesDynamic InjunctionOnline InfringementPersonality RightsOtherAnil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors.
A celebrity's personality and publicity rights, reinforced by the constitutional right to privacy, protect against unauthorised commercial exploitation of name, image, voice and likeness, including through emerging technologies su…
AI And DeepfakesDomain NamesDynamic InjunctionPersonality RightsDesignsCarlsberg Breweries A/S v. Som Distilleries and Breweries Ltd.
A single suit combining a cause of action for infringement of a registered design with a cause of action for passing off is maintainable under Order II Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 where both claims flow from the sa…
Composite SuitCopyright Design OverlapDesign InfringementPassing OffPatentsCommunication Components Antenna Inc. v. Ace Technologies Corp. & Ors.
In assessing infringement at the interim stage, patent claims are to be given a purposive construction covering the substance of the claimed technical solution, and a defendant's unexplained refusal to disclose technical data pecu…
Adverse InferenceClaim ConstructionInterim InjunctionPatent InfringementDesignsCrocs Inc USA v. M/s Bata India Ltd and Ors.
In commercial litigation, costs ordinarily follow the outcome of the case, and the successful party is awarded actual and reasonable litigation expenses. Parties pursuing commercial disputes must bear the financial consequences of…
Actual CostsCancellation of DesignDesign InfringementIndustrial DesignCopyrightCryogas Equipment Private Limited & Anr. v. Inox India Limited & Ors.
Whether an artistic work is a design capable of registration under Section 2(d) of the Designs Act, 2000, so as to lose copyright protection under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 upon industrial reproduction beyond fifty …
Artistic WorkCopyright Design OverlapFunctionalityIndustrial ReproductionOtherD.M. Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v. Baby Gift House & Ors.
Every individual, and particularly a celebrity, possesses an enforceable right of publicity in the commercial value of his persona, including name, likeness, voice, style and mannerisms, which can be licensed to a corporate entity…
Character MerchandisingFalse EndorsementPassing OffPersonality RightsCopyrightDAZN Limited & Anr. v. Back.methstreamer.com & Ors.
Websites that are substantially and primarily dedicated to unauthorised communication to the public of exclusively licensed broadcasts may be restrained by a permanent, whole-site injunction under Section 37 of the Copyright Act, …
Broadcasting RightsCopyright InfringementDigital PlatformsDynamic InjunctionPatentsDr. Aloys Wobben & Anr. v. Yogesh Mehra & Ors.
Section 64(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 grants alternative, not cumulative, remedies for seeking revocation of a patent: a petition before the Appellate Board, or a counter-claim in an infringement suit. Once a person interested el…
Counter-claimElection of RemediesPatent LitigationPatent RevocationCopyrightDr. Ashok M. Bhat v. Harichand Nagpal & Ors.
An injunction against use of a registered artistic work follows the artistic work onto any label, not merely the one impugned in the plaint. In Order XXXIX Rule 2A proceedings justification is no defence: so long as an order stand…
Contempt of InjunctionCounterfeitingExemplary CostsOrder XXXIX Rule 2ATrade MarksHamdard National Foundation (India) & Anr. v. Sadar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.
While composite trade marks must be compared as a whole under the anti-dissection rule, it is permissible to examine a dominant or significant common element in determining the overall commercial impression, and a composite mark m…
Anti-Dissection RuleComposite MarksDeceptive SimilarityTrade DressTrade MarksHavells India Ltd. & Anr. v. Amritanshu Khaitan & Ors.
In comparative advertising, a trader may compare one or more material, relevant and verifiable features of its product with a competitor's, including price, without being obliged to disclose every attribute of the rival's goods; f…
Comparative AdvertisingDisparagementHonest PracticesSection 29(8)OtherICC Development (International) Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises & Anr.
The right of publicity is derived from the right of privacy and vests exclusively in a living individual and the indicia of that individual's personality, such as name, likeness, voice and signature. Publicity or personality right…
Ambush MarketingFalse EndorsementPassing OffPersonality RightsPatentsInterDigital Technology Corporation & Ors. v. Xiaomi Corporation & Ors.
An Indian court may grant an anti-enforcement or anti-anti-suit injunction restraining a party from giving effect to a foreign anti-suit order that seeks to prevent litigation of patent infringement claims properly within the Indi…
Anti-Anti-Suit InjunctionComity Of CourtsCross-Border LitigationFRANDTrade MarksLaxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah & Anr.
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 MarksTrade MarksMarriott Worldwide Corporation v. Hotel Marriot Prime & Anr.
Where a defendant fails to contest a commercial suit despite service and a subsisting interim injunction, a court may grant summary judgment under Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure without recording oral evidence; and a …
DamagesDeceptive SimilarityPassing OffTrademark InfringementPatentsMonsanto Technology LLC & Ors. v. Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. & Ors.
Revocation of a patent on a counter-claim under Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970 cannot be decided summarily; it presupposes a full trial in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure, particularly where patent exclusion under…
Biotechnology PatentCounter-claimInterim InjunctionPatent EligibilityTrade MarksReliance 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 DressOtherShivaji Rao Gaikwad v. M/s Varsha Productions
A celebrity's name is an attribute of his personality in which he holds an enforceable personality right, even absent statutory recognition of such a right in India; where the celebrity would be readily and exclusively identified …
False EndorsementFilm And OTT ContentPassing OffPersonality RightsOtherTabassum Jamal Hashmi v. Ashok Kumar & Ors.
An individual's personality rights, encompassing name, image, voice, likeness and other distinctive attributes, are protectable by injunction against unauthorised commercial exploitation, and this protection extends to misuse effe…
AI And DeepfakesDynamic InjunctionIntermediary LiabilityPersonality RightsPatentsTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) v. Intex Technologies (India) Ltd.
In disputes over standard essential patents, an implementer who negotiates without genuine intent to license while continuing to exploit the patented standard is an unwilling licensee, and courts may order interim security, includ…
FRANDInterim InjunctionPatent InfringementStandard Essential PatentTrade MarksUnder Armour, Inc. v. Aditya Birla Fashion & Retail Ltd.
Although composite marks must be compared in their entirety under the anti-dissection rule, a mark may contain a dominant element that contributes disproportionately to its overall commercial impression, and such a dominant elemen…
Anti-Dissection RuleComposite MarksDeceptive SimilarityDominant MarkCopyrightUniversal City Studios LLC & Ors. v. DotMovies.Baby & Ors.
Where rogue websites persistently pirate copyrighted content and reappear under mirror or alphanumeric-variant domain names, a court may grant a dynamic injunction that extends, without a fresh suit, both to future mirror or redir…
Copyright InfringementDigital PlatformsDynamic InjunctionFilm And OTT ContentCopyrightUTV Software Communications Ltd. & Ors. v. 1337X.to & Ors.
Where a website's predominant purpose is to facilitate copyright infringement on a commercial scale, evidenced by disregard for takedown notices, anonymised registration and the volume of infringing content, courts may declare it …
Copyright InfringementDigital PlatformsDynamic InjunctionOnline Infringement