An Advocate enrolled on the rolls of the Bar Council of the State of Andhra Pradesh. What started as curiosity about how the law protects ideas, brands, inventions, and creative works gradually developed into a genuine passion for studying and explaining IP law, inspiring me to pursue a Masters degree (LL.M.) in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).
In a significant procedural ruling, the Delhi High Court in Loreal SA v. Vekariya Nikunj Arvindbhai clarified that plaintiffs can amend a pending passing off suit to include trademark infringement once registration is granted. The Court emphasized the 'real controversy' test, rejecting the notion that subsequent registration requires a fresh lawsuit. By allowing the amendment under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, the Court aims to prevent the multiplicity of proceedings and streamline litigation. This decision offers crucial guidance for brand owners navigating shifting legal statuses during ongoing trademark disputes in India.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court restrained Veer Ji Malai Chaap from using footage of a supplier’s factory to promote its own brand. Justice Jyoti Singh’s interim order highlights the dangers of using contract manufacturing promotional material to create a false impression of ownership and hygiene standards. The court’s mandate for rapid content removal and its focus on consumer deception provide a vital lesson for franchise brands regarding trade secrets and attribution. This article explores the legal implications of misrepresentation and the protection of goodwill in the food industry.
In a significant ruling for Indian commercial litigation, the Delhi High Court ordered Crocs Inc to pay over Rs. 24 lakhs in litigation costs to Bata India. Following the cancellation of Crocs' design registration for lack of novelty, Justice Prathiba M. Singh emphasized that costs must follow the event, reflecting actual expenditure rather than symbolic amounts. This decision underscores the shift in Indian courts toward penalizing frivolous IP litigation. It serves as a stern warning to rights holders that pursuing weak design infringement claims now carries substantial financial consequences.
The second week of July 2026 saw significant activity across Indian courts. Key rulings include the Delhi High Court's rejection of bioavailability as a basis for therapeutic efficacy in patent law and the Bombay High Court's crackdown on unsupported 'common general knowledge' claims by the Patent Office. We also cover the latest developments in trademark disputes, including the boAt v. BOULT matter and new injunctions against AI-driven copyright scraping. Stay updated on these essential legal developments and international IP cases, including the latest in the AstraZeneca and OpenAI litigations.
In Deepak Nitrite Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents, the Bombay High Court has reprimanded the Patent Office for the 'bald invocation' of common general knowledge in refusal orders. Justice Arif S. Doctor emphasized that quasi-judicial authorities must identify specific sources and provide reasoned links when rejecting patent claims for lacking an inventive step. The court’s decision highlights a recurring pattern of non-speaking orders and reiterates that patent applicants are entitled to transparent, well-reasoned analyses. This ruling serves as a vital reminder of the standards required for a sustainable patent refusal.
The Bombay High Court’s ruling in John Cockerill Hamon SA v. Hamon Cooling Systems addresses a critical issue for corporate law: what happens to trademark rights when a subsidiary is separated from its parent group? Justice Arif S. Doctor held that a licensee cannot claim independent proprietary rights over a mark used under permission. This case serves as a warning for companies navigating post-restructuring brand use, highlighting the dangers of inconsistent pleadings and the legal weight of admissions made before the Trademark Registry regarding prior ownership and brand usage.
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction in favor of Landmark Crafts Limited against Shalini Garg, owner of Shree Mange Ram And Sons. The dispute centered on the defendant's attempt to use the 'ISI' prefix alongside the plaintiff's registered 'HP' mark to bypass trademark laws. Justice Jyoti Singh ruled that 'HP' remains the dominant feature of the mark, and certification indicators cannot be monopolized. This decision reaffirms the importance of consistent enforcement in protecting a brand's hard-earned goodwill against deceptive 'fig leaf' tactics in the fastener industry.
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal by Intra-Cellular Therapies regarding a patent for deuterated psychiatric drug compounds. The court reaffirmed that a broad genus claim in earlier patents precludes novelty for specific species, even if not explicitly named. Furthermore, the judgment clarifies that evidence of improved bioavailability does not automatically satisfy the enhanced therapeutic efficacy requirement under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act. This decision serves as a crucial warning to pharmaceutical innovators that pharmacokinetic data alone is insufficient to support patent claims without proven clinical improvements in therapeutic outcomes.
The Bombay High Court's ruling in Atyati v. Cognizant offers a masterclass in documenting independent creation for design marks. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh dismissed the copyright infringement suit, emphasizing that the 'reasonable opportunity of access' is a strict threshold that requires more than mere speculation. Furthermore, the court recognized reverse passing off as a viable legal claim in India, even while ruling against it on the facts. This decision is essential reading for companies undergoing rebrands, highlighting the importance of maintaining contemporaneous documentation to shield against claims of copying.
Personality rights in India have evolved rapidly, transforming from a privacy-based concept under Article 21 to a robust framework protecting digital personas. With no specific statute, courts have built protections using copyright, trademark law, and the IT Act to combat deepfakes, voice cloning, and unauthorized commercial exploitation. This article examines the shift from celebrity-focused litigation to the inclusion of medical professionals and content creators. We analyze the critical roles of John Doe orders and dynamic injunctions, while highlighting the increasing necessity for clear legislative intervention to standardize enforcement across Indian High Courts.
•16 min read
Free Email Newsletter
Stay Ahead in IP Law with Its IP Time
Receive concise weekly and monthly IP Law updates.
