Author: ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

Danone Asia Pacific Holdings Pte. Ltd. Vs. Syed Jawed Mohsin & Another Facts Danone Asia Pacific Holdings Pte. Ltd., part of the globally known Danone Group, has a long history in the nutrition sector dating back to 1896. One of its most recognized products in India is Protinex, a nutritional protein supplement brand introduced in 1957. Over time, the ownership of this brand changed hands. It was first registered by Dumex Pvt. Ltd., later acquired by Pfizer Group in 1972, then taken over by Wockhardt Group in 2006, and finally assigned to the Danone Group through a deed of assignment.…

Mr. AR Rahman Vs. Ustaf Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar And Ors Order date: 24.09.2025 Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 86/2025 Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:8522 Name of Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi Name of Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Hari Shankar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash Shukla Facts The story of this legal battle starts with a famous musician named Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, who is a Padma Shri awardee and a well-known singer in the Dagarvani style of Dhrupad, which is a type of old Indian classical music. He is the son of the late Ustad N. Faiyazuddin Dagar…

Nokia Technologies Oy Vs. Asustek Computer Inc & Ors. Facts Nokia Technologies Oy (Plaintiff) initiated three connected suits against Asustek Computer Inc, Acer Inc, and Hisense Group Holdings, alleging infringement of two patents, IN 424507 and IN 338105. The defendants manufacture electronic products and were accused of using Nokia’s patented technology without authorization. To substantiate its claims and to comply with court procedure, Nokia also proposed to file comparable licensing agreements signed with third parties, many containing sensitive commercial information. Procedural Detail The core dispute in these suits related to the creation and functioning of a “Confidentiality Club” to safeguard…

Fact This case is about a company called Triumph Designs Limited, which is the petitioner, asking the court to cancel a trademark owned by Tube Investments of India, the first respondent, and another party. The trademark in question is “Triumph,” registered under number 135253 in class 12, which covers cycles that are driven only by feet, like basic bicycles. The main reason the petitioner wants this cancellation is because the respondent has not used the mark at all for a very long time. The petitioner is a well-known company from the United Kingdom that makes motorcycles and is part of…

Shoranur Metal Industries LLP & Another Vs. The Metal Industries Limited & Another Facts The story of this case begins with a company called The Metal Industries Limited, which is owned by the Government of Kerala. This company has been around for about 94 years, starting way back, and its main office is in Shoranur. They make tools for farming, such as sickles, spades, shovels, pickaxes, axes, saws, cutleries, and mammatties. Their products are sold under the brand name Tusker, which comes with a special emblem. Over the years, this company built a good name for itself, and people know…

SML Limited Vs. Safex Chemicals (India) Ltd — Order Summary Facts This case involves a company called SML Limited, which used to be known as Sulphur Mills Limited, claiming that another company, Safex Chemicals (India) Ltd, was wrongly using a trade name very similar to its own. SML Limited makes products like fertilizers and plant nutrients, and it registered the name “TRACKON” for these items in 2019 after applying in 2018. It also registered “TRACKON GOLD” in 2021. The company changed its name to SML Limited in 2022 and updated the registrations to reflect this change. SML Limited says it…

Facts This case centers on a dispute over a real estate development project in Mumbai involving multiple parties, including developers, individuals, and housing societies. The story begins with a development agreement signed on May 7, 1995, between the Gorai Road Ashtavinayak Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Societies Union Ltd., a federation of housing societies, and Sailee Developers Pvt. Ltd. The agreement was for redeveloping a property, where Sailee Developers was supposed to provide new flats to the existing members of the societies and use the remaining development potential for its own profit. On June 24, 1997, a few more societies joined the…

Facts of the Case The dispute arose when the appellant, Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., popularly known for its brand association with dairy products, filed an opposition against the trademark application of Respondent No. 2. The Respondent No. 2 had applied for registration of the mark “Doodh” under Class 30. The appellant filed Opposition No. 1298974 challenging this application on various grounds, asserting that the registration of such a mark would adversely affect its business interests and was liable to be refused under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Registrar of Trade Marks, however, by order dated 24…

Fox and Mandal Trademark Case – High Court of Calcutta Facts The case concerns an application for consolidation and analogous hearing of three related proceedings pending before the Intellectual Property Rights Division of the Court. The petitioner sought to consolidate these proceedings for effective and consistent determination of disputes regarding ownership and use of the mark. Procedural Background The petitioner requested consolidation of the suit (IP-COM 6 of 2025) with a writ petition (WPO-IPD 1 of 2025) and another commercial suit (IP-COM 31 of 2025), all concerning rival claims to rights in the trademark “Fox & Mandal”. Reliefs claimed included…

Introduction The petition sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to transfer rectification petitions pending before the Registrar of Trade Marks, Ahmedabad, to the Intellectual Property Division (IPD) of the Madras High Court. The aim was to consolidate and ensure speedy disposal alongside an existing civil suit. Facts The petitioner filed civil suit C.S.(Comm.Div.) No. 199 of 2023 alleging trademark infringement and passing off. Two rectification petitions, numbered 272370 and 272372, were pending before the Ahmedabad Registrar concerning trademark registrations in classes 27 and 35. The petitioner requested transfer of these rectification petitions to the IPD of the Madras…