SUPREME COURT
Supreme Court Stays Swiss Company's Patent Suit Against Techfab Before Himachal Pradesh High Court
Case Title: TECHFAB INDIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED vs GEOBRUGG AG
Case Number: SLP(C) 29151/2026
The Supreme Court stayed further proceedings before the Himachal Pradesh High Court in a patent infringement suit filed by Swiss company Geobrugg AG against Techfab. The dispute concerns the manufacture and sale of high-tensile wire mesh products sold under the "TECCO" brand. A Bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli issued notice and directed the parties to complete pleadings.
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Bombay High Court Restrains Cloud Kitchen From Using 'BARBECUE' Mark Over Similarity With Restaurant
Case Title: Tervinder Singh Jhans & Ors. v. Pankaj Rai & Ors.
Case Number: Appeal Against Order 42 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 471
The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court temporarily restrained a cloud kitchen from using the marks "BARBECUE" or "BARBEQUE". The order protected the registered trademark of Barbecue and Barbecue Food Services Pvt Ltd, which has operated a restaurant in Nagpur since 1994. Justice Y.G. Khobragade allowed the appeal against the District Judge's order.
Case Title: Zee Learn Limited v. Pragati Shiksha Shrot Trust
Case Number: COMM ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.21131 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 472
The Bombay High Court restrained a Dehradun-based school from using the "MOUNT LITERA ZEE SCHOOL" and "MLZS" marks pending arbitration. Justice Amit Borkar partly allowed the petition filed by Zee Learn Limited, holding that a former licensee cannot continue using a licensor's mark after the termination of the license agreements.
Bombay High Court Orders Takedown of AI Deepfakes Misusing Actor Shruti Haasan's Personality Rights
Case Title: Shruti Haasan v. Mahalaxmi Arts and Craft Works & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.26123 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 26069 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 488
The Bombay High Court ordered the removal of online content identified in actor Shruti Haasan's suit and restrained the unauthorized use of her name, voice, and image through artificial intelligence. Justice Madhav J. Jamdar granted the ad-interim relief after finding a strong prima facie case of personality rights infringement.
Bombay High Court Refuses Metro Brands Leave To Combine Claims Against Kerala Rival In Mumbai
Case Title: Metro Brands Limited v. Met Brands Private Limited
Case Number: LEAVE PETITION (L) NO. 12067 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL IPR SUIT (L) NO. 12028 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 487
The Bombay High Court refused Metro Brands Limited leave to combine its passing-off claim with its trademark infringement suit against Kerala-based Met Brands in Mumbai. Justice Gauri Godse observed that the balance of convenience favoured a trial in Kerala where the alleged passing off occurred and the rival carries on business.
DELHI HIGH COURT
Delhi High Court Revives Patent Bid For Improved Process To Make Sugammadex
Case Title: Fresenius Kabi Ipsum SRL v. The Asst. Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 7/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 934
The Delhi High Court set aside the Patent Office's refusal of a patent application for an improved process to prepare sugammadex, a muscle relaxant reversal drug. Justice Jyoti Singh observed that the applicant was denied a mandatory opportunity of hearing, noting that pre-grant opposition hearings cannot replace a separate hearing required before rejection.
Delhi High Court Dismisses Review Of Suppression Findings, Says Counsel Cannot Shift Duty To Junior
Case Title: Nugenesys Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Celagenex Research (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 167/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 933
The Delhi High Court dismissed a review petition filed by the counsel on record for Celagenex. The counsel sought to review findings that material documents were suppressed in a trademark suit over 'RewireX'. The court held that filing counsel cannot shift responsibility to juniors or clients for ensuring full disclosures.
Case Title: ASR Market Ventures Private Limited v. Fitship Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 93/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 928
The Delhi High Court dismissed a rectification petition filed by ASR Market Ventures (the company behind FITPASS) against Fitship's registered 'FITFEAST' trademark. Justice Jyoti Singh held that ASR failed to establish goodwill in 'FITFEAST' as a standalone mark and refused to grant an interim injunction.
Delhi High Court Appoints Amicus Curiae In Janhvi Kapoor's Personality Rights Suit
Case Title: JANHVI KAPOOR v/s ASHOK KUMAR/JOHN DOE AND ORS
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 868/2026
The Delhi High Court appointed Advocate Gautam Bhatia as an amicus curiae to assist the court in the personality rights suit filed by actor Janhvi Kapoor. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani made the appointment to address complex, overarching legal questions around broad personality right claims.
Case Title: Capital Foods Private Limited v. Patson Foods (India) Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 936/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 904
The Delhi High Court temporarily restrained Patson Foods from selling its "Rasanand Schezwan Chutney". Justice Jyoti Singh noted that the defendant went back on a written undertaking to stop using Capital Foods' registered "Schezwan Chutney" mark, making out a prima facie case of trademark infringement.
Delhi High Court Restrains YouTube Loan Settlement Channels From Using IDFC First Bank's Marks
Case Title: IDFC First Bank Limited v. Settlement Guru & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 848/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 902
The Delhi High Court restrained individuals running YouTube channels, including “Settlement Guru” and others, from using IDFC First Bank's registered trademarks. The court observed they were allegedly utilizing fabricated bank letterheads and logos to dupe borrowers into defaults.
Delhi High Court Restrains Kollam Hotel From Using 'HILTON' And 'HOTEL HILTON INDIA' Marks
Case Title: Hilton Worldwide Manage Limited & Anr. v. M/S Hotel Hilton India
Case Number: CS(COMM) 913/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 901
The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction restraining a Kerala-based establishment from using the marks “HILTON” and “HOTEL HILTON INDIA”. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that Hilton Worldwide had established a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off.
Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Alleged Fraudsters In Recruitment Scam From Using HCL Marks
Case Title: HCL Corporation Pvt Ltd v. John Does & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 127/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 894
The Delhi High Court temporarily restrained newly impleaded defendants from misusing HCL Corporation's trademarks in a fraudulent job racket scam. Justice Jyoti Singh extended an earlier injunction, holding that HCL had established a strong prima facie case of trademark infringement.
Delhi High Court Rejects Reddy Pharmaceuticals' Review Plea In 'REDDY' Trademark Dispute With DRL
Case Title: Reddy Pharmaceuticals v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories
Case Number: RFA(OS) 138/2013
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 893
A Division Bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla dismissed a review petition filed by Reddy Pharmaceuticals. The court declined to re-examine its judgment which upheld a permanent injunction restraining the use of the mark “REDDY”.
Delhi High Court Rejects Trademark Appeal Over “DIGESTO PLUS”, Says Mark Common To Trade
Case Title: Hahnemann Scientific Laboratory India Pvt. Ltd. v. Meera Rastogi Trading As Hahnemann Memorial Laboratory
Case Number: FAO (COMM) 182/2026 CM APPL. 43491/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 892
The Delhi High Court dismissed Hahnemann's appeal in a trademark dispute over "DIGESTO PLUS". A Division Bench held that "DIGESTO" is descriptive and common to the trade, and its use cannot establish deceptive similarity between competing digestive products.
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Case Title: M/s. Screen Scene Media Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v. Dr. S. Venkatesh
Case Number: A.No.3144 & 3145 of 2026 & O.A.Nos.626 & 627 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 251
The Madras High Court permitted Screen Scene Media to proceed with the theatrical release of the Tamil film Karathey Babu starring Jayam Ravi. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu modified a previous interim injunction that had restrained the producer from releasing or distributing the film.
Case Title: Eros Technologies Digital FZE v. Ayngaran International Media Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: OA No. 454 of 2026 and A No. 2680 of 2026 in C.S. (Comm. Div.) No. 140 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 253
The Madras High Court ruled that a copyright infringement dispute can be resolved through arbitration when the parties have agreed to that mode of dispute resolution. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu held that the statutory civil remedies available under the Copyright Act do not bar arbitration.
Madras High Court Rejects Vinbros Plea To Sue Rivals Over 'Blue Grape' Trademark
Case Title: M/s Vinbros and Co. v. M/s Chamundi Winery and Distillery & Anr.
Case Number: A No. 2575 of 2026 in C.S(Comm.Div.) 19644 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 249
The Madras High Court rejected liquor manufacturer Vinbros' plea to sue two rival entities in Chennai. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed that the mere registration situs of the trademark being in Chennai does not give rise to a cause of action if no part of the infringement occurred there.
Madras High Court Rejects YouTube's Summary Dismissal Plea In Sri Eshwar College Disparagement Case
Case Title: Youtube (Google LLC) v. Sri Eshwar College of Engineering
Case Number: A No. 191 of 2026 IN C.S(COMM DIV) No. 253 of 2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 250
The Madras High Court declined YouTube's application seeking threshold dismissal of a disparagement suit. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu ruled that the issue of non-joinder of the actual video creators could not be decided at the summary stage and directed the matter to proceed to trial.
Madras High Court Rejects Film Archive's Copyright Claim Over 'Aval Appadithan' Production Stills
Case Title: The Cinema Resource Centre & Anr. v. Ms. Ganga Rudraiah & Anr.
Case Number: O.S.A.(CAD)No.17 of 2022 & C.M.P.No.2260 of 2022
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 247
The Madras High Court dismissed an appeal by film archive The Cinema Resource Centre over production photos from the 1978 film Aval Appadithan. A Division Bench directed the archive to return the original photographs and cease displaying digital or physical duplicates on its platform.
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Calcutta High Court Rejects Injunction Against New Central Book Agency After Years Of Inaction
Case Title: Pares Chandra Das & Anr. v. New Central Book Agency Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: G.A. No. 1 of 2023 In I.P. (COM) No. 11 of 2024 (Old No. CS 216 of 2023)
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 203
The Calcutta High Court dismissed an interim injunction application filed by textbook authors. Justice Krishna Rao held that authors cannot seek to stop the distribution of books after actively allowing the publisher to distribute them for years despite claiming agreements had expired.
COPYRIGHT OFFICE
Copyright Office Says AI System DABUS Can't Be Copyright 'Author' Under Indian Law
Case Number: 9356/2022-CO/A
The Indian Copyright Office rejected an application seeking copyright registration for an artwork listing DABUS, an AI system, as its author. Registrar of Copyrights Prof. (Dr.) Unnat P. Pandit held that an AI system cannot be recognized as an "author" under the Copyright Act, 1957.
COMMERCIAL COURT
Bengaluru Court Orders Instagram To Restore Account Suspended Over IPL-Related Posts
Case Title: QEscapades Pvt. Ltd. v. Instagram Inc. & Anr.
Case Number: ORIGINAL SUIT No.5023/2026
A Bengaluru civil court directed the restoration of an Instagram account suspended over alleged trademark infringement relating to the IPL. The court held that permanent suspension was wholly disproportionate to the nature of the posts.