TRADEMARK
CALCUTTA HC RULED IN FAVOUR OF BISK FARM FOR TM INFRINGEMENT CASE
SAJ Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (“Petitioner”), the
Kolkata-based manufacturer, manufactures biscuits, snacks, and
bakery products under the brand ‘Bisk Farm'. They have
registered the trademark ‘Top Gold' for its biscuits in
2005. The Parle (“Respondent”) launched a new product
under the same class, Class 30, under the name ‘Top Gold
Star', thus infringing the registered mark of the Petitioner
‘Top Gold'. The Petitioner contended that this was the
act of passing off and approached the Calcutta HC to restrain the
Respondents from using the impugned mark.
The Calcutta HC ruled in favour of the Petitioner and passed an ad
interim order to save the Petitioner from irreparable loss and
injury. Thus, the court granted an injunction restraining the
Respondent from selling and marketing their new biscuit product
under the brand name ‘Top Gold Star' until 27th August
2024. However, the court permitted the Respondent to use the
branding ‘Top' without using the word
‘Gold'. The matter is posted for further hearing on
27th August.
TRADEMARK
BOMBAY HC RESTRAINS INDIAN CO. FROM USING DECEPTIVELY
SIMILAR MARK
Les Laboratories Servier (“Plaintiff”), an
international pharmaceutical group governed by a non-profit
foundation filed a suit against Selfier Life Science
(“Defendant”), an Indian manufacturing company of
medicines. Plaintiff owns the registered trademark
‘SERVIER', which was allegedly infringed by
Defendant's trademark ‘SEFIER'. Both companies
are involved in medicinal and pharmaceutical products. It was
observed by the court that physicians, doctors, and chemists are
not immune to confusion or mistakes, but the similarity and
confusion between the products should be examined from the view of
an ordinary person.
Thus, Bombay HC restrained Defendant from using the mark
‘SEFIER' which was deceptively similar to
Plaintiff's trademark by observing that the primary duty of
the court is towards the public.
Reference:
(1) Les Laboratories Servier vs Sefier Life Science Private Ltd. (Com IPR Suit (L)/18086/2024)
TRADEMARK
DELHI HC CANCELS ANDAAZ-E-NIZAM TM
Indian restaurant chain ‘Nizams', owned by Rajesh
Chugh (“Plaintiff”) filed a case against the food
outlet ‘Andaaz-e-Nizaam' owned by Mehruddin Ansari
(“Defendant”). The plaintiff has been using
‘Nizam's' trademark since January 1978 in respect
of food, drinks, and temporary accommodation. The Plaintiff alleged
that the impugned trademark was deceptively similar and identical
to its registered trademark.
The Delhi HC ordered the cancellation of the Defendant's
trademark and directed the Registrar of Trademarks to remove or
cancel the Defendant's registered trademark. The court also
directed the Defendant to rename his outlet to
‘Daawat-e-Nizammuddin' or
‘Andaaz-e-Nizammuddin'.
Reference:
(1) http://Shri Rajesh Chugh v. Mehruddin Ansari & Anr. (C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 28/2024 & I.A. 3613/2024)
COPYRIGHT
ILAIYARAAJA PAID RS 60 LAKH COMPENSATION FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
Ilaiyaraaja (“Plaintiff”), the legendary music
composer, sued the movie makers of ‘Manjummel Boys'
(“Defendant”) for using the song ‘Kanmani
Anbodu' from the movie ‘Gunaa'. The rights to the
song belong to the music companies Pyramid and Sri Devi
Sounds.
Plaintiff claimed that the song played a pivotal role in the
success of the movie and that Defendant had not sought permission
to use the song. However, Defendant claimed that they had acquired
the film's musical rights, to which Plaintiff refused.
The Plaintiff issued a legal notice to the Defendants after the
release of the movie in February demanding Rs 2 crore. However, the
matter has now been settled and the Defendant gave a compensation
of Rs 60 Lakh to the Plaintiff.
COPYRIGHT
DELHI HC APPOINTS ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE OVER THE PERSONALITY RIGHTS OF YUVRAJ SINGH
Former Indian cricketer Yuvraj Singh (“Plaintiff”),
approached Delhi HC against Brilliant Etoile Private Limited
(“Defendant”), a real estate firm, alleging violation
of his personality rights while promoting a real estate project.
Plaintiff claimed that Defendant had misused his brand value and
contravened the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
between the parties. Even after the expiry of the MoU, Defendant
continued commercial use of the services provided by Plaintiff,
which includes the use of his photographs on billboards, project
sites, social media posts, etc. The plaintiff claimed that the
misuse violated his Copyrights, Personality Rights, and Right to
Publicity.
The Delhi HC appointed an arbitrator to resolve this dispute. The
arbitration would take place under the Delhi International
Arbitration Centre.
(1) Yuvraj Singh Bundhel v. M/s Brilliant Etoile Private Limited (ARB.P. 984/2024)
PATENT
DELHI HC GRANTS INTERIM RELIEF TO FALCON AUTOTECH
Falcon Autotech Private Limited (“Plaintiff”), a
leading Indian warehouse automation company, was granted a patent
in 2021 for an ‘Integrated Pre-Sortation System' by the
Indian Patent Office. These systems are engineered to automate
critical operational processes within the supply chain and improve
the product delivery systems in the logistics sector. Kengic
Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd. (“Defendant”), a
Chinese warehouse automation company, supplied an identical machine
replicating the Plaintiff's patent system to one of its
customers. Thus, Plaintiff filed an application for an interim
injunction against the Defendant. Plaintiff contended that
Defendant is attempting to launch its business in India by offering
and selling the infringing products to the customers.
The Delhi HC granted an interim injunction against the Defendant,
as the Plaintiff would have suffered much loss. The Court also
restrained the Defendant from manufacturing, importing, selling,
offering for sale, advertising, exhibiting, and promoting the
infringing products.
(1)Falcon Autotech Private Limited vs Kengic Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd. (CS(COMM) 643/2024 & I.A. Nos. 35231/2024, 35232/2024, 35233/2024 & 35234/2024)
PATENT
SANOFI SUES SAREPTA FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT OVER GENE THERAPY
Sanofi-owned biotech company Genzyme (“Plaintiff”) has sued Sarepta Therapeutics (“Defendant”) for patent infringement of Plaintiff's technology involving Adeno-associated Virus (AAV) vectors, for modifying viruses used to deliver genes into human cells in gene therapy treatments like Elevidys. Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) is a severe degenerative genetic disorder, which can be treated by Elevidys. Plaintiff claimed that Defendant mimics their gene therapy technologies to make Elevidys. Hence, Plaintiff filed the suit in Delaware federal court and asked for an unspecified amount of damages for the Defendant's alleged patent infringement.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.