| | |

Mrs. Ishi Khosla v. Anil Aggarwal and Anr.

Mrs. Ishi Khosla v. Anil Aggarwal and Anr.; 2007 (34) PTC 370 (Del) Facts: Mrs. Ishi Khosla (Plaintiff) founded a sole proprietorship firm called ‘M/s. Whole Foods’, involved in the business of manufacturing and retailing ‘healthy and healing food products’. Although the Plaintiff applied for registration of the trademark – ‘Whole Foods’ somewhere around July, 2004,…

|

Grandlay Electricals (India) Ltd. & Ors. v. Vidya Batra & Ors.

Grandlay Electricals (India) Ltd. & Ors. v. Vidya Batra & Ors. 1998 (18) PTC 646 (Del) Brief Facts: Plaintiff No. 1 was a partnership firm involved in manufacturing wires, cables/electric cables and insulated wires. Plaintiff No. 1 enjoyed goodwill for its quality products under the registered trademark “Grandlay Cables”. Plaintiff No. 2 and four others…

|

Bikanervala v. New Bikanerwala

Bikanervala v. New Bikanerwala 2005 (30) PTC 113 (Del) Facts of the case: The Plaintiff is a partnership firm involved in manufacturing and marketing ethnic food including sweets and namkeens since 100 years. In 1981, they opened an outlet in Karol Bagh under the trade mark “Bikanervala”. In 1992, Plaintiff also adopted an artistic label…

Geepee Ceval Proteins and Investment Private Limited v. Saroj Oil Industry

Geepee Ceval Proteins and Investment Private Limited v. Saroj Oil Industry 2003 (27) PTC 190 (Delhi) Brief Facts: Plaintiff was a company engaged in the manufacture of edible oil, since 1997, being sold under the trade mark ‘Chambal’. In 1997-1998, Plaintiff’s turn-over was about Rs. 113 crores and in 2003 at around Rs. 241 crores….

|

Cadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Cadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 2001 PTC 541 (SC) Full Bench Brief Facts: Appellant and Respondent were Pharmaceutical companies who had taken over the assets and business of erstwhile Cadila Group after its restructuring under Section 391 & 394 of the Companies Act. One of the conditions in the scheme of restructuring…

|

M/s. Hindustan Radiators Co. vs. Hindustan Radiators Limited

M/s. Hindustan Radiators Co. vs. Hindustan Radiators Limited 1987 PTC 73 Brief Facts: Plaintiff, M/s. Hindustan Radiators Co., Station Road, Jodhpur was a partnership concern which was carrying its business since 1959 and was engaged in manufacturing various types of radiators to be used in vehicles like buses, trucks, jeeps, cars, cranes, compressors, etc. under…

|

Dabur India Ltd. v. K. R. Industries

Dabur India Ltd. v. K. R. Industries AIR 2008 SC 3123 Brief Facts: The Appellant, Dabur India Ltd., manufactured a product known as ‘Dabur Red Tooth Powder’ or ‘Dabur Lal Dant Manjan’. The Appellant claimed copyright in the ‘carton’ of the product and alleged that the said ‘carton’ constitutes an ‘artistic work’ under Section 2(c)…

| |

McCain International Ltd. v. Country Fair Foods Ltd.

McCain International Ltd. v. Country Fair Foods Ltd. 1981 RPC 69 Brief Facts: In January 1979, McCain International Limited(Plaintiff) launched in the market chipped potatoes and conducted an extensive advertising campaign in which they referred consistently and accurately to ‘McCain Oven Chips’ in the same way as they so referred consistently extensively and accurately in…

|

American Home Products Corporation v. Mac Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

American Home Products Corporation v. Mac Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. 1986 (6) PTC 71(SC) Brief Facts: American Home Products Corporation (Appellant), was an American multi-national corporation dealing in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals. Geoffrey Manners & Co. Ltd. (“the Indian Company”) was a company registered as a public limited company in India. In 1956 the…