Metro Brands v. Brand Magic: Bombay HC Protects Prior User of METRO Mark
The Bombay High Court refused to grant an ad-interim injunction to Metro Brands, ruling that Section 34 prior user rights override Section 28 registration exclusivity.
Browse the archive
The Bombay High Court refused to grant an ad-interim injunction to Metro Brands, ruling that Section 34 prior user rights override Section 28 registration exclusivity.
An analysis of e-commerce marketplace liability for counterfeits under Indian IP law, examining safe harbour under Section 79 of the IT Act, Trade Marks Act provisions, and landmark Delhi High Court rulings involving Amazon and Flipkart.
Seeking to resolve trademark rectification India delays, the Madras High Court ordered the Registrar of Trademarks to decide Good Drop Wine Cellars' petition in eight weeks.
Madras High Court rules Trade Marks Registry cannot refuse renewal fee under Rule 58(3) so long as mark remains on the Register without formal statutory removal.
Madras High Court IPD exercises Section 125(2) Trade Marks Act and Article 226 powers to transfer pending trademark rectification from Registry to High Court.
The Gujarat High Court held that a trademark's legal situs is fixed at the statutory registry, preventing state authorities from demanding extraterritorial stamp duty.
Examining whether names of deities and religious symbols can be monopolized as trademarks under Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Madras High Court upheld an order allowing a trademark infringement plaint amendment to detail business origin and chain of title under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC.
The Madras High Court mandates the Registrar to transfer trademark rectification proceedings to the High Court, bypassing administrative inertia to ensure judicial efficiency.
The Madras High Court ruled that IPD Rules do not allow automatic transfer of district court infringement suits to the High Court, prioritizing statutory jurisdiction.