High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, Single Judge | Date of Decision: 21st July, 2026 Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 8/2026 and I.A. 3697/2026, Bench: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh BACKGROUND The Appellant, ADS Spirits Pvt. Ltd., incorporated in 2010 and part of the ADS Group of Companies described as a fast-growing liquor conglomerate in the […]
ADS Spirits Pvt. Ltd. v. The Registrar of Trade Marks Read More »
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, Single Judge | Date of Decision: January 9, 2026 Case Number: CS(COMM) 361/2018, with IA Nos. 49679/2024, 34537/2024 and 32689/2025 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tejas Karia BACKGROUND The Suit was originally filed in the name of Plaintiff No. 2, acting as Court Receiver of Plaintiff No. 1 (M/s
Nadeem Majid Oomerbhoy & Anr. v. Sh. Gautam Tank & Ors. Read More »
High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction | Decided: 19 January 2026 Interim Application No. 4642 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 336 of 2024 Bench: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh Citation: 2026:BHC-OS:141 Background The Supreme Industries Limited, the plaintiff, is a company that conceived and adopted the trade mark
The Supreme Industries Limited v. Moorthi Rabeha Read More »
The right of publicity is the legal right of an individual to control the commercial use of their identity their name, image, likeness, voice, signature and other recognizable attributes of their persona. It is a right that sits at the intersection of intellectual property law, personality rights and the law of torts and its significance
When a court of competent jurisdiction grants an injunction restraining a defendant from using a particular trademark, the natural expectation is that compliance is straightforward the defendant ceases the infringing use and the dispute, at least at the interlocutory stage, is resolved. In practice, however, defendants frequently do not simply stop. They modify the mark,
The Safe Distance Rule in Indian Trademark Law – Infringement After an Injunction Read More »
High Court of Delhi | 22 June 2026 Case Number: CS(COMM) 346/2026, I.A. 9898/2026, I.A. 9911/2026 & I.A. 10797/2026 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela BACKGROUND The plaintiff, Devans Modern Breweries Limited, claims to have been founded in 1961 by industrialist Shri Dewan Gian Chand and to be one of the leading manufacturers of
Devans Modern Breweries Limited v. Cartel Bros Private Limited & Anr. Read More »
High Court of Delhi | 17 January 2026 Case Number: CS(COMM) 84/2025 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tejas Karia BACKGROUND The plaintiff, Alkem Laboratories Limited, was established in 1973 and is engaged in research and development, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of pharmaceutical and nutraceutical products in India and in international markets, with a presence in
Alkem Laboratories Limited V. Prevego Healthcare and Research Pvt. Ltd. Read More »
High Court of Judicature at Madras | Decided: 10 September 2012 O.S.A. Nos. 406 and 407 of 2010 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Jyothimani & Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Duraiswamy (Division Bench) Citation: 2013 (53) PTC 1 (Mad) | 2012 SCC OnLine Mad 4582 Background Consim Info Pvt. Ltd., the appellant in both appeals, is
Consim Info Pvt. Ltd. v. Google India Pvt. Ltd. & Others Read More »
Every time a consumer types a brand name into a search engine, they are doing something instinctive and commercially significant: they are expressing brand preference. The search query “Hindware sanitaryware” or “MakeMyTrip flights” or “Agarwal Packers and Movers” is not a neutral information request it is a declaration of where the consumer intends to spend
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi (Division Bench) | Decided: 10 August 2023 | FAO(OS)(COMM) 2/2022 & FAO(OS)(COMM) 22/2022 | Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Mahajan Background Google LLC, the appellant in FAO(OS)(COMM) 2/2022, owns and operates the Google Search Engine and the Google Ads Programme (formerly AdWords).