Delhi High Court rules that the word “Chacha”, though common in daily speech, becomes distinctive when used for sarees and garments. Reversing the lower court, it grants interim injunction against similar use by another trader, clarifying that dominant features drive customer recall and registration presumes protection even for ordinary words in unrelated trades.

Introduction The beauty and skincare market is crowded, and brand names often borrow from nature. When a new face cleanser…

Introduction: Delhi High Court Allows Registration of “One For All” Delhi High Court has allowed the registration of the mark…

Introduction In a clear and practical ruling, the Delhi High Court has once again reinforced that trademarks which are registered…

Introduction The case of Gillette Safety Razor Company versus Anglo-American Trading Company stands as a classic illustration of how courts…

Introduction The Delhi High Court has sent a clear message to litigants in intellectual property matters: you cannot withdraw a…

Introduction The case revolves around the trademark registration battle for the mark ‘TAJPURIYA’ in Class 33 for alcoholic beverages, highlighting…

Case Overview The Delhi High Court in a significant ruling has set aside the refusal of a patent application involving…

Madras High Court dismisses appeals by 7-Eleven International LLC, upholds Deputy Registrar’s 2014 order granting “Big Bite” trademark registration in Class 30 to Ravi Foods Private Limited as prior user in India; holds that international reputation and prior foreign adoption/early filing date cannot override local prior use absent proof of goodwill or spillover reputation in India, reinforcing strict application of territoriality under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Delhi High Court holds that in defamation suits filed against anonymous “John Doe” defendants under Section 19 CPC, territorial jurisdiction is determined based on circumstances at the time of institution, and subsequent revelation of defendants’ identities does not warrant return of plaint under Order VII Rule 10, even if it reveals a merger of wrong and residence; demurrer principle applies, barring evidentiary inquiries into plaint documents at threshold stage.