DELHI HIGH COURT
Case Title: Tetra Technologies, Inc. v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C)-IPD 33/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1143
The Delhi High Court set aside the Patent Office's decision to abandon Tetra Technologies' patent application, holding that merely recording the dispatch of an email containing the First Examination Report was insufficient without proof of effective communication. The Court restored the application and granted the company eight weeks to respond to the objections.
Case Title: Niva Bupa Health Insurance Company Limited & Anr. v. Mr. Vishal Rattewal & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1032/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1141
The Delhi High Court held that an influencer's use of a company's trademark merely to refer to it in critical social media posts did not amount to trademark use in the course of trade under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Justice A.J. Bhambhani held that the dispute did not concern infringement of intellectual property rights and was therefore not maintainable before the Court's Intellectual Property Division.
Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains RK Cables From Using Packaging Similar To V-Guard Wires
Case Title: V-Guard Industries Limited v. Ashok Kumar Trading as R.K. Industries & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1117/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1140
The Delhi High Court temporarily restrained R.K. Industries and associated sellers from dealing in electrical wires using packaging allegedly imitating V-Guard's black-and-yellow trade dress. The Court also directed IndiaMART and TradeIndia to remove specified product listings, finding a prima facie case of infringement and passing off.
Delhi High Court Cancels 'The Brew Bukhara' Trademark On ITC's Plea
Case Title: ITC Limited & Anr. v. Umesh Arora & Anr.
Case Number: C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 48/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1138
The Delhi High Court cancelled the registration of the “THE BREW BUKHARA” device mark following a challenge by ITC Limited and ITC Hotels Limited, which alleged deceptive similarity with their established “BUKHARA” trademark. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav noted that the registered proprietor had not filed a reply and that his trademark agent had informed the Court that use of the mark had been discontinued.
Case Title: Kangana Ranaut v. Meta Platforms Inc. & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1100/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1101
The Delhi High Court has recently directed Meta Platforms Inc. to remove, within 72 hours, AI-generated sexual deepfakes, morphed images and fabricated statements attributed to actor and MP Kangana Ranaut. Justice Vikas Mahajan also ordered the offending sites to be blocked. The Court found that her stature “inherently grants her proprietary rights over her personality and associated attributes”.
Actor Kriti Sanon Moves Delhi High Court To Protect Her Personality Rights
Case Title: Kriti Sanon v. BBE Marketing Inc. & Ors.
Actor Kriti Sanon approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection of her personality rights, including her image and voice. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked her counsel to submit a comprehensive compilation of relevant judgments and legal materials to assist the Court in examining the scope of personality rights.
Case Title: Rakesh Bedi v. John Doe/Ashok Kumar & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1049/2026
The Delhi High Court observed that clear boundaries must be drawn between personality rights and publicity rights, noting that such claims increasingly overlap with defamation, caricatures and independent creative works. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav raised three questions for consideration: what personality rights protect, what constitutes publicity rights, and who can claim these rights. The Court called for compilations of judgments and written submissions to assist its examination of the legal issues.
Delhi High Court Blocks 20 Rogue Websites Streaming DAZN's Serie A Football Matches
Case Title: DAZN Limited v. Stremeo.ru & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1113/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1118.
The Delhi High Court restrained 20 rogue websites from streaming DAZN's exclusively licensed Serie A Football Season 2026–27 matches without authorisation. Justice Tejas Karia directed domain name registrars and internet service providers to block the identified websites and permitted real-time blocking of newly discovered mirror websites. The Court observed that unauthorised streaming threatened DAZN's revenue and undermined its investment in acquiring the broadcast rights.
Case Title: Dominos IP Holder LLC & Anr. v. M/s Domin'd Pizza & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 461/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1124.
The Delhi High Court permanently restrained three pizza outlets from using names deceptively similar to Domino's trademarks, including “Domin'd Pizza”, “Domind's Pizza”, “Domzz Pizza”, “Domi'd Pizza” and “Dom'd Pizza”. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that the outlets' use of confusingly similar names for identical goods could amount to trademark infringement and mislead consumers ordering food through online delivery platforms. The Court decreed the suit after the relevant defendants failed to appear. The plaintiffs did not press their claims for damages and costs.
Delhi High Court Permanently Bars Hisar Coaching Operators From Using 'CAREER POWER' Mark
Case Title: Metis Eduventures Private Limited India v. Career Power Coaching Centre Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 916/2022
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1126.
The Delhi High Court permanently restrained two Hisar-based coaching operators from using the “CAREER POWER” mark and its device, or the name “METIS EDUVANTURES”, in a suit alleging passing off and copyright infringement. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that a final decree was necessary to protect Metis Eduventures' rights, notwithstanding the defendants' compliance with an earlier interim injunction.
Delhi High Court Protects Amazon's Upcoming Film 'Nayyi Naveli' From Online Piracy Ahead Of Release
Case Title: Amazon Seller Services Private Limited v. https://cinemalux.baby/ & Ors.
The Delhi High Court protected Amazon's upcoming film Nayyi Naveli against unauthorised online distribution. Justice Vikas Mahajan directed rogue websites not to broadcast or stream the film without authorisation following its release. Amazon argued that it was the first owner and distributor of the film and held the copyright under its production arrangements. The Court granted protection against anticipated online piracy ahead of the film's October 16, 2026 theatrical release.
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Refusal To Register 'COBBLE STONE' Trademark
Case Title: Cobble Stone Private Limited v. The Registrar of Trade Marks
Case Number: C.A. (COMM.IPD-TM) 79/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1106
The Delhi High Court set aside the Registrar of Trade Marks' refusal to register “COBBLE STONE” for non-metallic building materials and remanded the application for fresh consideration. Justice Vikas Mahajan directed the Registrar to decide the application within 60 days. Cobble Stone had argued that the Registrar failed to consider documents supporting its use of the mark since 2011 and its claim of honest concurrent use.
Delhi High Court Restrains Imperia Decor From Using 'ALUMAC' Trademark For Building Materials
Case Title: Alucopanel Industries v. Imperia Decor Industries & Anr.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1095/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1105.
The Delhi High Court restrained Imperia Decor Industries and another company from using “ALUMAC” for aluminium composite panels and related building materials, finding the mark deceptively similar to Alucopanel Industries' registered “ALOMAX” trademark. Justice Vikas Mahajan observed that a director of the defendant company had previously been associated with the plaintiff, suggesting that the adoption of the competing mark was not bona fide. The Court found a likelihood of consumer confusion and granted an interim injunction.
Case Title: Archian Foods Private Limited v. Goldenstuff and Beverages Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1105/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1103
The Delhi High Court temporarily restrained Goldenstuff and Beverages Private Limited and other defendants from selling soft drinks using packaging allegedly imitating Archian Foods' “Lahori Zeera” products. Justice Vikas Mahajan found that similarities in labels, colour schemes, bottle shapes and branding could deceive consumers. The injunction protects the plaintiff's relevant trademarks, copyrights, trade dress and registered bottle design. The Court deferred deciding whether the defendants could continue using the word “Indian” in their marks.
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Madras High Court Upholds Refusal To Register INEXO's FEDEXO Mark Over FedEx's Well-Known Trade Mark
Case Title: INEXO Cast Metal Solutions Pvt Ltd v. Federal Express Corporation & Anr.
Case Number: CMA(TM) No. 4 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 325
The Madras High Court upheld the refusal to register “FEDEXO”, finding that FedEx's trademark had acquired well-known status in India before INEXO applied for registration in 2009. Justice A.D. Maria Clete held that adding the letter “O” did not sufficiently distinguish the mark from FEDEX and clarified that formal recognition as a well-known trademark does not necessarily determine when the mark acquired its reputation.
Madras High Court Sets Aside Refusal Of 'THE SKIN COMPANY' Trademark, Orders Advertisement
Case Title: Tregum Remedies Private Limited v. The Senior Examiner of Trademarks
Case Number: CMA(TM) No. 1 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 315.
The Madras High Court set aside the refusal of Tregum Remedies' application to register “THE SKIN COMPANY” in Class 3 and directed the Trade Marks Registry to advertise the mark in the Trade Marks Journal. Justice P.B. Balaji held that the Registry had failed to give adequate reasons, consider the applicant's reply and assess the composite mark as a whole. The Court reiterated that a composite trademark should not be dissected by focusing on individual words in isolation.
Madras High Court Sets Aside Refusal To Register Exponent Energy's 'EXPONENT' Trademark
Case Title: Exponent Energy Private Limited v. The Registrar of Trademarks
Case Number: C.M.A. (T.M.) No. 5 of 2026 and C.M.P. No. 1615 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 322
The Madras High Court set aside the refusal to register “EXPONENT” as a word mark for Exponent Energy Private Limited. Justice A.D. Maria Clete held that the Registrar had not adequately explained the likelihood of confusion or considered a relevant statutory exception under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The application was remitted for fresh consideration within three months of the first hearing.
Madras High Court Grants Injunction Against Piracy Of Vijay Deverakonda's Ranaballi
Case Title: Mythri Movie Makers v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.
Case Number: O.A. No. 1144 of 2026 and C.S. (COMM DIV) No. 288 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 321
The Madras High Court granted an interim injunction restraining unauthorised recording, reproduction and distribution of Ranaballi, starring Vijay Deverakonda and Rashmika Mandanna. Justice P.B. Balaji passed the order on October 15, ahead of the film's theatrical release on October 16, after the producer raised concerns about online piracy.
Madras High Court Closes Aamir Khan Productions' Copyright Suit Over “Batwara 1947” After Withdrawal
Case Title: Aamir Khan Productions Pvt Ltd v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.
Case Number: C.S. (COMM DIV) No. 239 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 320
The Madras High Court dismissed as withdrawn Aamir Khan Productions' copyright suit seeking protection of Batwara 1947 against online piracy. Justice P.B. Balaji recorded the withdrawal on October 13, following instructions from the production house's counsel. The connected interim applications were also dismissed.
Madras High Court Restrains Online Piracy Of Rajinikanth's 'Jailer 2' Ahead Of Release
Case Title: Sun TV Network Limited v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.
Case Number: O.A. Nos. 1130 and 1131 of 2026 and A. No. 4432 of 2026 in C.S. (COMM DIV) No. 284 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 317.
The Madras High Court restrained unauthorised copying, uploading, streaming and distribution of Rajinikanth-starrer Jailer 2 ahead of its scheduled release. Justice P.B. Balaji granted an interim injunction in favour of producer Sun TV Network Limited and directed internet service providers and other concerned service providers to block identified piracy websites, including mirror, redirect and alphanumeric URL variants notified by the producer or its authorised agents.
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Bombay High Court Refuses To Restrain Kangana Ranaut's 'Queen Full Power' Over Copyright Dispute
Case Title: Phantom Studios India Pvt. Ltd. v. Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 5177 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 97 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(BOM) 569
The Bombay High Court refused to restrain the making and release of Queen Full Power, starring Kangana Ranaut and directed by Vikas Bahl. Phantom Studios India Pvt. Ltd., claiming a 50% share in the intellectual property rights in the 2014 film Queen, had sought relief alleging passing off and breach of contract. Justice Sandeep V. Marne found that Phantom had failed to establish a prima facie case warranting an injunction.
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Case Title: Ramji Lal Agarwal v. Sourav Agarwal
Case Number: CS-COM/178/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 258
The Calcutta High Court held that a dispute over an alleged breach of a family settlement restricting use of the trade name “Sindharam Sanwarmal” fell within its Commercial Division rather than its Intellectual Property Rights Division. Justice Aniruddha Roy declined to grant an interim injunction but directed the defendant to maintain accounts and set apart profits earned from the disputed business.
Case Title: ITC Limited v. SMM Tobacco Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: APDT/24/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 255.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed ITC Limited's appeal against the refusal to exempt its trademark and copyright infringement suit concerning alleged counterfeit cigarettes from pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Division Bench of Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Partha Pratim Roy held that the plaint did not establish the urgency required to bypass mediation. The Court emphasised that a plaintiff must demonstrate an imminent risk of injury and explain why mediation cannot be pursued before seeking urgent judicial intervention.
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Uttarakhand High Court Restrains Use Of 'SWARNIKA' Mark Pending Suit Over Similarity With 'SUNAREKA'
Case Title: Deepanshu Bansal v. Poonam Bhatt
Case Number: Appeal From Order No. 332 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (UTT) 13
The Uttarakhand High Court restrained jeweller Poonam Bhatt from using the trademark “SWARNIKA” pending disposal of a suit alleging infringement of Deepanshu Bansal's registered “SUNAREKA” mark. Justice Ravindra Maithani held that competing trademarks must be assessed as a whole when determining deceptive similarity, rather than treating differences in spelling as decisive.