|

Alfred Dunhill Limited v. Kartar Singh Makkar and Ors.

Alfred Dunhill Limited v. Kartar Singh Makkar and Ors. 1999 (19) PTC 294 (Del) Brief Facts: Plaintiff was a company incorporated under the laws of England and engaged in manufacturing and marketing a wide range of products including textiles under the trademark ‘DUNHILL’. Defendants were also engaged in manufacturing and selling the textile articles under…

|

Mars Incorporated v. Kumar Krishna Mukherjee & Ors.

Mars Incorporated v. Kumar Krishna Mukherjee & Ors. 2003 (26) PTC 60 (Del) Brief Facts: Plaintiff was the proprietor of the Trademark ‘MARS’, which was registered in India and in as many as 170 countries. It was used in respect of chocolates, confectionery, preserved food products and other foodstuffs in India. Defendants sought to incorporate…

| |

Manisha Koirala v. Shashilal Nair and Ors.

Manisha Koirala v. Shashilal Nair and Ors.; 2003 (1) AllMR 426 Brief Facts: Four scenes of four minutes in a film, titled ‘Ek Chhoti Si Love Story’ were the subject matter of dispute. The story of the film was about an adolescent boy who was obsessed with a girl who was 26 years old and…

|

Larsen and Toubro Limited v. Lachmi Narain Trades and Ors.

Larsen and Toubro Limited v. Lachmi Narain Trades and Ors. 2008 (36) PTC 223 (Del) (DB) Facts: Appellant (Larsen and Toubro Ltd.) was engaged in diverse business activities, with subsidiaries using the prefix ‘LandT’ for over half a century. It applied for registering the marks ‘Larsen and Toubro’ and ‘LandT’, the applications of which were…

Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. M/S. Mahaluxmi Textile Mills

Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. M/S. Mahaluxmi Textile Mills; 2009 (41) PTC 184 (Cal) (FB) Facts: The Plaintiff/Appellant, Sony Kabushiki Kaisha, was a Japanese Co. (also known as Sony Corporation) engaged in manufacturing and selling diverse range of electronic goods including video and audio equipment, televisions, etc. under the trademark ‘SONY’. Defendant/Respondent (M/S. Mahaluxmi Textile Mills)…

| | |

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…