Updates From Courts & Registry

Recently, the High Court of Delhi, directed the Registrar of Copyrights to remove the copyright registration obtained by Vijay Keshav Wagh (“Respondent”) for the artistic work titled “SHREE SAKSHAT” since it copied the TIGER beer logo owned by Heineken Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. (“Petitioner”).   It was the Petitioner’s case that the Respondent’s artistic work clearly incorporates the Petitioner’s identical artistic work of its mark TIGER. The Petitioner also claimed that mere ad

Recently, the Bombay High Court vacated an ex-parte ad-interim injunction obtained by Elder Prrojects Limited ("Plaintiff") against Elder Neutraciticals Private Limited ("Defendant") and dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction, after finding gross suppression of material facts.   The Plaintiff claimed to have coined and used the ELDER device mark since 1992-93 for pharmaceutical products and obtained registration thereof in June 2024 in Class 5. The Pla

The Delhi High Court’s Division Bench in  Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v. Controller of Patents  has delivered a significant ruling on the architecture of revocation under the Patents Act, 1970, in the context of IN 243301 covering Linagliptin. The decision addresses how Section 64 revocation interacts with Section 107 invalidity defences and with the expiry of the patent itself.   The Court framed two central questions. 1.       Can a revocation petition under S

Recently, a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court allowed an appeal filed by Lotus Herbals Private Limited (“Lotus Herbal”) against an order passed by the Ld. Single Judge of the Delhi High Court and granted an interim injunction against DPKA Universal Consumer Ventures Private Limited (“DPKA”) restraining it from using the LOTUS SPLASH and LOTUS marks and/or any other mark nearly identical/deceptively similar to Lotus Herbal’s LOTUS mark.   Despite a prima facie  finding o

The Delhi High Court’s ruling in Yangtze Memory Technologie Co. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.  delivers a sharp procedural reminder for patent applicants: the right to file a divisional application ends the moment the parent patent is granted. The Court holds? Interpreting Section 16(1) of the Patents Act, 1970, the Court reaffirmed that a divisional application may be filed only “at any time before the grant of the patent.”  Once the patent is granted, the window closes - co

Recently, the Delhi High Court allowed a trademark rectification petition filed by Satya Paul (“Petitioner”), the proprietor of the trademark ARUN, and directed the rectification of the trademark “AiC ARUN” registered in favour of Alka Industrial Corporation (“Respondent”) by ordering deletion of the word “ARUN” from the trademark.   The Petitioner claimed to have adopted the trademark ARUN in 1962 for sewing machines and related parts. The Petitioner relied on multiple regis

Recently, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court refused to cancel the registered trademark, REKIN-SP, of Rekin Pharma Private Limited (“Respondent”) in a cancellation petition filed by Rexcin Pharmaceuticals Private Limited (“Petitioner”).   The Petitioner had filed the petition under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (the “Act”), seeking removal of the Respondent’s registration for the mark, REKIN-SP in Class 5, on the grounds of prior rights and deceptive similarity of the riv

The Delhi High Court’s Division Bench has now pronounced its decision in Canva Pty Ltd & Ors v. RxPrism Health Systems Pvt Ltd & Anr, a significant moment for patent enforcement in the Indian SaaS and tech ecosystem, it is a wake-up call for both SaaS startups and IP practitioners navigating India’s evolving software-patent landscape.   RxPrism, holder of Indian Patent IN 360726 for a system and method for creating and sharing interactive content through a layered architectur

Recently, in an appeal filed by the appellant, Karan Rathore, the Delhi High Court overturned an order passed by the Trade Marks Registry (“Registry”) dismissing an opposition filed by the appellant against an application filed by the respondent, Shivam Rathore. The appellant is the registered owner of the mark JBR Device, which covers motor parts in Class 12. In July 2020, the appellant’s predecessor-in-interest formally authorized the respondent to use the appellant’s mark

The Delhi High Court has handed down an important decision in  Alkem Laboratories Ltd. v. Prevego Healthcare & Research Pvt. Ltd. , observing that device marks cannot automatically grant protection over the word or letters comprised therein, unless shown to have acquired secondary meaning. The court held that a registration for a device of the mark ‘A TO Z’ will not offer protection against use of the marks “A TO Z” or “AZ”, since these would be inherently descriptive.   The

Semaglutide is the rare drug that sits at the intersection of science, culture and capital. The Delhi High Court’s semaglutide order in CS(COMM) 565/2025 Novo Nordisk v Dr Reddy’s shows how Indian courts will police the outer edge of that capital: the extra years companies try to add through follow‑on patents.​   Novo’s enforcement hinged on a later “species” patent, IN262697, claiming semaglutide as a specific GLP‑1 analogue. An older “genus” patent, IN275964, had already cl

In C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 10/2025, the Delhi High Court set aside the refusal of Indian Patent Application No. 202117029591 filed by Nippon Steel Corporation for an invention titled “High-Strength Steel Sheet and Manufacturing Method of High-Strength Steel Sheet”. The Controller had rejected the application on the ground that “proof of right” was not established for one deceased inventor, invoking Sections 6(1)(b), 6(1)(c) and 7(2) of the Patents Act to question Nippon Steel’s en

In a recent judgment, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court (“Court”) has served an important and timely reminder that damages must necessarily be based on evidence which proves that the claimant suffered actual loss, and that any calculation based on speculative assumptions would be liable to be set aside.   The judgment came in an appeal by the Defendant/Appellant challenging a Trial Court decision where the Defendant’s mark “Amrit Nayan Jyoti” was found to be deceptivel

The Bombay High Court recently upheld an interim injunction granted by the District Court, Nagpur restraining Ifra Sheikh (“Appellant”) from using Mobile Bidi Traders’ (“Respondent”) registered trademark ONLINE BIDI.   Before the District Court, the Respondent asserted that it is engaged in the manufacture and sale of bidis since 2005 and holds a valid trademark registration for the ONLINE BIDI mark since 2017, along with copyright registration for its label . As per the Res

The Delhi High Court has, in a recent case, restrained Patanjali Ayurved Limited (“Patanjali”) from broadcasting a disparaging advertisement in a suit filed by Dabur India Limited (“Dabur”).   Recently, Dabur came across an advertisement by Patanjali where it portrayed all Chyawanprash products as “ dhoka ” (deception) and implied that only Patanjali’s own Patanjali Special Chyawanprash represented the “true power of ayurveda”.   Dabur submitted that the advertisement labe

In a recent order, the Delhi High Court granted ex parte interim relief in a trademark dispute filed by Novalife Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. (“Plaintiff”) against Mr. Bharat Sachdeva and his associated concerns Novvalife Karnal and Novvalife Sri Ganganagar (“Defendants”), concerning the use of the mark NOVVALIFE, which is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s registered mark NOVALIFE.   The learned counsel for the Plaintiff contended that the Plaintiff, engaged in migration adviso

Recently, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, dismissed a plea filed by Suparshva Swabs India (“Appellant”), the manufacturer of cotton buds and hygiene products, seeking, inter alia, a decree of permanent injunction restraining AGN International & Ors. (“Respondents”) from using the mark TULIP or AGN TULIP in relation to perfumes, cosmetics, and allied goods, on the grounds of trademark infringement and passing off. One of the key grounds for rejection was that the Appellant fa

The Delhi High Court recently decided a rectification petition filed by Ardo Medical AG, seeking cancellation of the trade mark ARDO Device, subject of Registration No. 4578111, in Class 44, in the name of M/s. SDB International.   The petitioner, Ardo Medical AG, a Swiss company, engaged in development, production, and distribution of products for premature babies and newborns, has been operating under its mark for over 25 years. It uses and owns registrations for its mark i

The Supreme Court, in an appeal filed by Novenco Building and Industry A/S (“Novenco”) against the judgements passed by the Division Bench and Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in favour of Xero Energy Engineering Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (“Xero Energy”), held that in cases involving continuous infringement of intellectual property rights, the mandatory requirement of pre-litigation mediation can be waived when urgent relief is necessary to prevent public dece

Recently, the Delhi High Court dismissed the application filed by Dayal Industries Private Limited (“Defendant”), seeking permission to file a rectification petition against M/s Gopika Industries’ (“Plaintiff”) registered mark DYAL. The Plaintiff filed a suit, inter alia, alleging that its mark DYAL in Class 31 (dated April 4, 1996) has been infringed by the Defendant. In its written statement, the Defendant laid down four grounds: (a) it is the prior user of DAYAL, used for

Recently, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court directed the Trade Marks Registry (“Registry”) to remove a trade mark registration for the mark CROOSE (Stylized), owned by JNG Footstep Private Limited (“Respondent”), based on a cancellation petition filed by Crocs Inc. (“Petitioner”), based on its rights in the mark CROCS.   It is the Petitioner’s case that its goods under the mark CROCS are sold worldwide, including India, since the last several years, for which it has obtained trade