Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi Case No.: CS (COMM) 393/2018 Decided on: 26 July 2022 Presiding Judge: Justice Prathiba M. Singh Citation: Mondelez India Foods Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Neeraj Food Products, CS (COMM) 393/2018 (Del. HC, 26 July 2022) Background The Plaintiff No. 1, Mondelez India Foods Private Limited (formerly […]
Mondelez India Foods Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Neeraj Food Products Read More »
M/s UCB Farchim SA v. M/s Cipla Ltd. & Ors., W.P.(C) No. 332 of 2010 (along with connected matters), Delhi High Court, decided on 8 February 2010 Background Writ petitions before the Delhi High Court raised an important procedural question under Indian patent law: whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is
Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. & Ors. v. Monsanto Technology LLC & Ors., FAO (OS) (COMM) 86/2017 & 76/2017, Delhi High Court, decided on 11 April 2018. Background This case arose from a long-standing dispute between Monsanto Technology LLC and Indian seed companies led by Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. Monsanto held Indian Patent No. 214436, which related to
Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. & Ors. v. Monsanto Technology LLC & Ors. Read More »
Novartis AG & Anr. v. Cipla Ltd., CS(OS) 3812/2014, Delhi High Court, decided on 9 January 2015. Background This case arose out of a patent dispute between Novartis AG and Cipla Ltd. Novartis held Indian Patent No. 222346 for the drug Indacaterol, including its salt form Indacaterol Maleate, which is used for treating Chronic Obstructive
Pre-grant and post-grant opposition proceedings under the Patents Act, 1970 constitute one of the most distinctive features of the Indian patent system. Unlike several jurisdictions that rely predominantly on post-grant administrative review or judicial revocation, India has preserved a dual opposition framework that enables scrutiny both before and after grant. This structure reflects a deliberate
Compulsory licensing under The Patents Act, 1970 represents one of the most carefully calibrated intersections between private intellectual property rights and the constitutional commitment to public welfare. The Act makes it clear that patents are not granted as absolute monopolies insulated from social accountability. Instead, they are conditional statutory privileges, conferred subject to compliance with
Copyright law does not only protect creativity, but it also controls how creative work is shared and used. Like a poem may start with a writer sitting alone, a song may begin in a music studio or a software program may be written on a laptop. But after creation, the work is usually published, performed,
Copyright law is not just a technical subject of law it is a law that protects creativity and imagination. In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 along with the Copyright Rules, 2013 provides a proper legal system to protect the rights of authors. Over the years through various amendments like of 1994 and 2012, the Act
Copyright law is not merely a technical branch of statutory interpretation; it is the architecture that protects imagination. In India, the Copyright Act, 1957, together with the Copyright Rules, 2013, represents a carefully constructed legal framework designed to recognize, secure and enforce the rights of authors. Over decades of legislative amendments-particularly in 1994 and 2012-the
In the architecture of trademark law, not all marks occupy the same position. Most marks perform a single function – they identify the source of goods or services and distinguish one trader’s products from another’s. Well-known trademarks do something more. Through sustained use, investment and public recognition, they transcend their original commercial context and become
