LiveLawBiz IPR Weekly Digest: July 06 - July 12, 2026
Riya Rathore
16 July 2026 10:07 PM IST
HIGH COURTS
DELHI HIGH COURT
Case Title: Salman Khan v. Ashok Kumar/John Doe & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 1322/2025
On July 6, Justice Jyoti Singh questioned the breadth of personality rights claims, specifically whether they could be used to stall the promotional content of a film titled Kala Hiran: The Battle for Legacy. The court asked for clarity on the extent to which such rights could stretch regarding artistic content and public titles.
Delhi HC Rejects Intra-Cellular Therapies' Patent Appeal, Holds Bioavailability Alone Insufficient
Case Title: Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. v. The Controller of Patents
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 24/2023
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 681
On July 6, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela upheld the rejection of a patent application for deuterated organic compounds used in psychiatric treatments. The court ruled that the claimed invention lacked novelty and that mere improvement in bioavailability was insufficient to meet patentability criteria.
Case Title: Emcure Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Orsim Pharma & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 530/2026
Justice Jyoti Singh imposed costs of ₹10,000 on Emcure Pharmaceuticals for filing an application for a court fee refund that had already been granted in a previous order. The court expressed displeasure over the oversight, noting that the company should have verified previous orders before filing duplicate pleas.
Case Title: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. & Anr. v. M/s Techtalkwithmalik & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 681/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 693
The court directed Reddit to provide particulars of an anonymous account behind a post alleging a "Samsung Galaxy S26 blast in the box". While declining an immediate takedown of the post, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani ordered the disclosure to identify the source of the alleged defamatory content.
Case Title: GOOGLE LLC V/S HINDWARE LIMITED & ORS.
Case Number: RFA(OS)(COMM) - 14/2026
A Division Bench issued notice on Google's appeal against a single judge's order that restrained Google from allowing "Hindware" as a keyword trigger for rival ads and awarded ₹30 lakh in damages. The Bench directed that this appeal be treated as a lead matter in related cases concerning ad keyword disputes.
Delhi High Court Restrains Former Geetanjali Franchisee From Using 'GEETANJALI' Trademarks
Case Title: Geetanjali Salon Private Limited v. Ms. Amita Dubey & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 689/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 694
The court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction restraining a former franchisee from using the "GEETANJALI" brand. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani found that the salon continued to operate under the trademarks even after the termination of the franchise agreement.
Case Title: Interdigital Patent Holdings Inc & Anr. v. Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co Ltd & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1045/2025, I.A. 24409/2025, I.A. 30455/2025, I.A. 31617/2025, I.A. 2901/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 672
The Delhi High Court has directed Shenzhen Transsion Holdings, which sells smartphones under the Itel, Infinix and Tecno brands, to deposit pro tem security with the Registrar General in patent infringement suits filed by InterDigital Patent Holdings over Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) covering 3G, 4G, 5G and HEVC video coding technologies.
Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Use Of 'ISI HP' Mark In Landmark Crafts' 'HP' Trademark Suit
Case Title: Landmark Crafts Limited v. Shalini Garg Proprietor of Shree Mange Ram and Sons
Case Number: CS(COMM) 693/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 692
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained a fastener seller from using the mark "ISI HP" for hardware products. The court found the mark prima facie deceptively similar to Landmark Crafts' registered "HP" trademark.
Delhi High Court Dismisses boAt's Second Bid to Restrain 'BOULT' Wordmark
Case Title: Imagine Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. Exotic Mile
Case Number: CS(COMM) 519/2019
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 690
The court dismissed a second interim injunction application by boAt (Imagine Marketing), holding that it was seeking relief on facts that had not been granted in previous proceedings. Justice Jyoti Singh noted that the earlier order clearly limited the injunction to specific device marks.
Case Title: ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED V/S JOHN DOE & ORS.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 716/2026
The court questioned whether an investment scam using a CEO's photograph could be classified as a personality rights claim. Justice Jyoti Singh observed that the allegations appeared more related to impersonation than a typical personality rights violation.
Case Title: Crocs Inc. USA v. M/S Bata India Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 625/2018
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 687
Justice Prathiba M. Singh directed Crocs Inc. to pay Bata India ₹24.63 lakh in litigation costs. The court noted that because Crocs' design registration had been cancelled for lack of novelty, its infringement suit against Bata was unsustainable.
Karam Industrial Works Gives Up 'K.I.W.' Trademark, Delhi HC Records Settlement In K.W. Mark Dispute
Case Title: K.W. Enterprises v. M/S Karam Industrial Works
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1035/2016
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 683
The court recorded a settlement where Karam Industrial Works agreed to stop using the "K.I.W." trademark and label for vehicle parts under Class 12. It also agreed to cancel its related copyright registration, while the plaintiff waived claims for damages.
Case Title: Abhishek Sharma v. Ashok Kumar & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 702/2026
Following an initial refusal on July 4 due to discrepancies in evidence, the Delhi High Court on July 11 indicated it will pass interim orders directing the takedown of infringing content. The suit filed by cricketer Abhishek Sharma seeks protection against AI-generated defamatory content and the unauthorized use of his name, image, and persona for commercial purposes across social media and e-commerce platforms.
Delhi High Court Restrains Traders From Using 'Beauty Of Joseon' Trademark And Trade Dress
Case Title: GoodAI Global Inc. v. Shahnawaz Siddiqui & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 679/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 682
On July 2, the Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction restraining multiple traders from using the trademark and trade dress associated with the "Beauty of Joseon" skincare brand. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani also directed Amazon Seller Services to de-list the impugned product URLs after finding a prima facie case of infringement.
Delhi High Court Restrains Hind Enterprises From Using 'EASTHRON' Mark For Similarity With 'EASTMAN'
Case Title: Eastman Auto and Power Limited v. M/S Hind Enterprises & Anr.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 684/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 687
The court restrained a Haridwar-based battery seller from using the trademark “EASTHRON” on July 3. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that the mark was prima facie deceptively similar to Eastman Auto and Power Limited's registered “EASTMAN” trademark and trade dress, noting that failure to grant relief would cause irreparable harm to the plaintiff.
Delhi High Court Restrains Hema Industries From Using 'FREEDINE' Mark In 'FREEDOM' Trademark Dispute
Case Title: Gemini Edibles And Fats India Ltd v. M/S Hema Industries
Case Number: CS(COMM) 674/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 676
Justice Jyoti Singh on July 2 temporarily restrained Hema Industries from using the trademark “FREEDINE” and its associated packaging. The court found that the mark and trade dress were deceptively similar to the "FREEDOM" brand of edible oils owned by Gemini Edibles and Fats India Ltd, satisfying the requirements for an ex-parte ad interim injunction.
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Case Title: Deepak Nitrite Limited v. The Assistant Controller General of Patents and Designs
Case Number: COMMERCIAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 107 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(BOM) 384
The Bombay High Court held on July 6 that the Controller of Patents cannot reject a patent application by relying on "common general knowledge" without identifying the specific source of such knowledge or establishing its existence prior to the application's priority date. Justice Arif Doctor set aside the rejection of Deepak Nitrite's application for a food-grade sodium nitrite production method, remanding the matter for a fresh hearing.
Bombay High Court Orders Takedown Of Content Infringing Actor Preity Zinta's Personality Rights
Case Title: Preity G. Zinta v. Google LLC & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.20703 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.245 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 379
Justice Madhav J. Jamdar directed major intermediaries, including Google/YouTube, X, and Meta, to remove or block access to specific URLs that infringed upon actor Preity Zinta's personality rights. The suit alleged the unauthorized use of her identity through AI-generated deepfakes, chatbot personas, and GIFs for commercial purposes.
Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief To Bristol Bakery, Grupo Bimbo In 'Bimbo' Trademark Dispute
Case Title: Bristol Bakery v. Grupo Bimbo S.A.B. DE C.V & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 13958 OF 2023 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 117 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 372
On July 6, the court refused to grant interim injunctions in cross-suits between Bristol Bakery and Mexican company Grupo Bimbo regarding the "Bimbo" trademark. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh observed that both companies had acquiesced to each other's use of the mark for years, and their long-standing coexistence should not be disturbed at the interim stage.
Case Title: Phantom Studios India Private Limited v. Jiostar India Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (l) NO. 23075 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL SUIT (L) NO. 22856 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(BOM) 391
The court declined to grant urgent ad-interim relief to Phantom Studios in its suit against JioStar over the film Queen Forever, which Phantom alleged was an unauthorized sequel to the 2014 film Queen. Justice Gauri Godse heard the claim regarding joint ownership of intellectual property but found no immediate grounds for relief.
Bombay High Court Restrains Hamon Cooling Systems From Using 'HAMON' Trademark
Case Title: John Cockerill Hamon SA v. Hamon Cooling Systems Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 345 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 7 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 376
Justice Arif S. Doctor granted an interim injunction restraining Hamon Cooling Systems from using the "HAMON" mark. The court found that the Belgian plaintiff, John Cockerill Hamon SA, had established a strong prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off.
Case Title: Atyati Technologies Private Limited v. Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation & Anr.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 7958 OF 2024 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 613 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 375
The court refused to restrain Cognizant from using its hexagonal logo, ruling that Atyati Technologies failed to prove that Cognizant had copied the design. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh noted that Cognizant prima facie established that the mark was independently created.
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Madras High Court Restrains Online Piracy Of Idhayam Murali Ahead Of Release
Case Title: Dawn Pictures Private Limited v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr.
Case Number: OA Nos. 687 & 688 of 2026 in C.S.(COMM.DIV.)No.198 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 172
The Madras High Court granted an ad-interim injunction restraining various internet service providers from infringing the copyright of the Tamil film Idhayam Murali ahead of its July 10 release. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed that such injunctions are necessary to prevent irreversible injury to film producers.
Madras High Court Protects Travel Content From Alleged AI Scraping, Grants Interim Relief
Case Title: Keshan Infotech Pvt Ltd v. Oliver Brandt & Ors.
Case Number: OA Nos. 637 to 640 of 2026 in C.S(COMM DIV) NO. 181 OF 2026 and A.Nos.2715 & 2716 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 167
In a significant copyright ruling on July 1, the Madras High Court granted an ad-interim injunction against the unauthorized scraping and AI-driven use of digital travel content. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu held that using proprietary content as training data or prompts for Large Language Models (LLMs) without permission raises a prima facie case of copyright infringement
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Case Title: Eternal Limited v. Eternl Resilienttech Private Limited
Case Number: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4339 OF 2026 (IPR)
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC KAR 102
The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed an appeal filed by Eternal Limited, formerly known as Zomato Limited, against a trial court's ad-interim ex-parte injunction restraining it from using the trademark "Eternal" in relation to services similar to those offered by Bengaluru-based Eternl Resilienttech Private Limited.
Case Title: M/s MI Marbo Italia v. M/s M Marble Italia
Case Number: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2946 OF 2015 (IPR)
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC KAR 103
The High Court dismissed an appeal and upheld a restraining order against the use of the trade name “MI Marbo Italia”. The court found the name deceptively similar to the registered trademark “M Marble Italia” (owned by Tile Italia Mosaics). Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar observed no perversity in the trial court's findings that granted the injunction in the long-standing trademark dispute.
TRADE MARKS REGISTRY
Case Title: Tanisha Sheth v. Coty Beauty Germany GmbH
Case Number: APPLICATION NO. 5241172
The Trade Marks Registry, Ahmedabad, refused the registration of "BOSSBABE" for cosmetics. The Assistant Registrar held that the mark was dominated by the word "BOSS," which is identical to the registered marks owned by Hugo Boss (represented by Coty Beauty).