Introduction Does a court retain any power once it pronounces its final judgment? This question, rooted in the doctrine of functus officio, came up for consideration before the Delhi High Court in a trademark infringement action involving Mahindra and Mahindra Limited. The decision offers clarity on the limits of judicial power post-decree, particularly in the…

Introduction A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court recently considered an appeal arising from the refusal of interim injunctive relief in a trademark dispute between Minco India Private Limited and Minco India Flow Elements Private Limited. The case presents an intersection of trademark law principles with family business dynamics, highlighting how suppression of material…

This appeal before the Division Bench (two Judge Bench) of the Bombay High Court arose from an order of the Learned Single Judge granting an interim injunction in a trademark dispute. The plaintiff, Bhavesh Suresh Kataria, had instituted a suit against Kataria Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd., alleging trademark infringement and passing off, and sought to…

The Bombay High Court recently considered an interim injunction application in a trademark dispute between Rynox Gears and Steelite India, involving the competing marks “RYNOX” and “RHYNOX” in the motorcycle accessories market. The case raised questions of trademark infringement, passing off, prior use, and the consequences of inconsistent pleadings in commercial litigation. Background of the…

A contentious trademark dispute before the Delhi High Court between Novartis AG and the “Noviets” group of entities has resulted in the grant of an interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using the mark “NOVIETS.” The case presents a conflict involving allegations of trademark infringement, passing off, unfair competition, dilution, etc, in the pharmaceutical sector…

A recent decision of the Delhi High Court reiterates a fundamental principle of Indian trademark law, prior user rights prevail over statutory registration. In a dispute over the mark “ATHERMAL,” the Court set aside an injunction granted by the District Court and granted interim protection to the party claiming earlier use of the mark. Background…

In a significant ruling concerning pharmaceutical trademark infringement, the Bombay High Court granted interim relief in favour of Laboratoires Griffon Private Limited, restraining the Defendants from using the marks “GLYNET” and “GLYZET” or any other mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs’ registered trademarks “GLIMET” and “GLIMET DS.” The Court also directed initiation of perjury proceedings…

The rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence technologies has ushered in an era of synthetically generated information (SGI), encompassing deepfakes, AI altered audio-visual content, and algorithmically manipulated media that blurs the line between reality and fabrication. In response, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) on 10th Feb amended the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and…

In every patent infringement case, the most important exercise is a careful comparison between the patent claims and the infringing product or process. The claims define the exact scope of the patentee’s rights. Therefore, infringement cannot be decided by broadly comparing two products or by looking at general similarities. The court must compare the infringing…

The Bombay High Court recently adjudicated a trademark dispute between Trackon Couriers Private Limited, the registered proprietor of the ‘TRACKON’ marks, and its former business associate, B.N. Srinivas. The issue arose from the Defendant’s continued use of the mark ‘TRACK-ON’ and allied trade names following the termination of their commercial relationship. Alleging infringement and passing…