Trademark Case Study
The Bombay High Court didn’t stop at an injunction against “PRINCE PLATINUM.” Seeing blatant piracy and market harm, it also appointed a Court Receiver to
01/10/2025
The Bombay High Court didn’t stop at an injunction against “PRINCE PLATINUM.” Seeing blatant piracy and market harm, it also appointed a Court Receiver to
Losing an interim injunction at first instance isn’t the end. If you can show serious triable issues and target the trial court’s errors of principle,
A Section 11(1) objection isn’t a dead end. If you can show market separation, distinct channels, consumer sophistication, and – critically peaceful co-existence (in India
The Bombay High Court restrained a rival from using “Tikha Lal” for chilli powder and imposed ₹2 lakh in costs after finding (i) the label
The Bombay High Court told the Trade Marks Registry to stop dissecting a composite/device mark into bits, and to judge it as a whole. In
Peaceful global co-existence and long, well-documented foreign use can unlock two powerful levers when Examiners raise Section 11 objections: (1) ask for “advertisement before acceptance”
Indian courts especially the Bombay High Court’s IP Division are telling Examiners and Registrars to show their work. Bare-bones refusals under Section 11 or Section
When a rival’s product looks so close to yours that a shopper could mistake it on a quick scan, courts treat that overall get-up (colour,
The Bombay High Court didn’t rubber-stamp a Section 11(1) refusal just because WR appears inside WR-V. It set aside a cryptic rejection and told the
The Bombay High Court restrained “Cocoplus” hair oils from using look-alike blue bottles, labels, and overall get-up that mimic Marico’s iconic Parachute range. The Court
