LiveLawBiz IPR Weekly Digest: June 29 - July 05, 2026
Riya Rathore
6 July 2026 7:40 PM IST
HIGH COURTS
DELHI HIGH COURT
Case Title: InterDigital Patent Holdings v. Shenzhen Transsion Holdings
Case Number: Not provided in source
Citation: Not provided in source
On July 1, the Delhi High Court directed Shenzhen Transsion Holdings, the maker of Itel, Infinix, and Tecno smartphones, to deposit pro tem security with the Registrar General. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the order in patent infringement suits involving Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) for 3G, 4G, 5G, and HEVC video coding technologies.
Case Title: Jain Shikanji Pvt. Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Jain
Case Number: CM(M)-IPD 36/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 669
On July 2, the Delhi High Court upheld a trial court's refusal to accept an unconditional apology from Anubhav Jain for "wilful violation" of an injunction restraining the use of the "Jain Shikanji" trademark. Justice Jyoti Singh affirmed the issuance of arrest warrants and property attachments while modifying the quantum of exemplary costs from ₹5 lakh to ₹3 lakh.
Delhi HC Grants Interim Injunction Against Use Of 'Freelite' Oil Mark For Similarity With 'Freedom'
Case Title: Gemini Edibles and Fats India Ltd v. Mr Chegu Vasudeva Siva Kumar & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 671/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 666
The Delhi High Court on July 1 granted an ad-interim injunction restraining the makers of 'Freelite' sunflower oil from using the mark and trade dress, finding it deceptively similar to the plaintiff's 'Freedom' brand. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani noted that the impugned packaging appeared similar to the plaintiff's established trademark on a "first blush" look.
Case Title: Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Finecure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 200/2023
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 665
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on July 1 restrained Finecure Pharmaceuticals from selling products under the mark 'PANTOPACID'. The court set aside a Single Judge's order, holding that the mark infringed Sun Pharma's registered 'PANTOCID' trademark and that injunctive relief should have been granted despite earlier findings.
Delhi High Court Restrains Both Ashiana Ispat And Kamdhenu From Using 'AL KAMDHENU GOLD' Mark
Case Title: Ashiana Ispat Limited v. Kamdhenu Limited & Ors.
Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 120/2026, CM APPL. 27051/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 663
On July 1, the Delhi High Court upheld an interim injunction restraining Ashiana Ispat Limited (AIL) from using "AL KAMDHENU GOLD" after it abandoned its trademark application. Simultaneously, the court restrained Kamdhenu Limited from adopting the same mark, as neither party established proprietary rights or commercial use.
Case Title: More Than Water Private Limited v. Nesco Limited
Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 123/2026 CM APPL. 28395/2026 CM APPL. 28398/2026 CM APPL. 29895/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 662
The Delhi High Court refused interim relief to "MORE THAN WATERBOX" in its dispute with "MY WATER BOX". A Division Bench denied discretionary relief because the plaintiff allegedly relied on prima facie manipulated invoices and withheld material facts regarding its food safety license application.
Delhi High Court Orders Blocking Of Rogue Websites Streaming Sony's Exclusive Sports Broadcasts
Case Title: Sony Pictures Networks India Private Limited v. Cricfree.cyou & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 672/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 659
The Delhi High Court has granted a temporary injunction restraining eight rogue websites from illegally streaming sporting events over which Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt Ltd holds exclusive broadcast and broadcast reproduction rights. The court directed domain name registrars, internet service providers and telecom service providers to block access to the infringing websites with immediate effect.
Case Title: Rukhmani Keshwani v. Raju Agarbatti Works & Anr.
Case Number: FAO (COMM) 99/2024, CM APPL. 30880/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 658
A Division Bench on July 1 restored a suit over the “RADHEY KRISHNA” agarbatti mark, holding that IndiaMart listings accessible in Delhi confer territorial jurisdiction. The court ruled that a Trial Court wrongly returned the plaint, as evidence showed the goods were available for purchase in Delhi via the online marketplace.
Delhi HC Holds Name Change Doesn't Nullify Arbitration Clause, Refers Newgen Dispute To Arbitration
Case Title: Newgen IT Technologies Ltd (earlier known as Vcare Infotech Solutions and Services Private Limited) v Newgen Software Technologies Ltd
Case Number: FAO (COMM) 112/2025 &CM APPL. 27327/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 656
The Delhi High Court referred a trademark dispute to arbitration on July 1, ruling that a change in corporate name does not extinguish an arbitration clause. The court set aside a Commercial Court order, holding that the clause survives in the subsisting agreement between the parties.
Delhi High Court Orders Takedown Of AI Deepfakes, Cloned Voice Ads Targeting Actor Ravi Kishan
Case Title: Ravindra Shukla Alias Ravi Kishan v. Ashok Kumar (John Doe) & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 680/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 674
On July 2, Justice Jyoti Singh directed intermediaries like Google and X to immediately take down AI-generated deepfakes and cloned-voice advertisements that infringed the personality rights of actor-politician Ravi Kishan. The court drew a line between satire and the unauthorized use of an actor's persona through artificial intelligence.
Delhi High Court Refuses ITC Bid To Stop Adyar Gate Hotels' Use Of 'Dakshin' Mark
Case Title: ITC Limited & Anr. v. Adyar Gate Hotels Limited
Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 207/2025 & CM APPL. 79554/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 654
A Division Bench dismissed ITC's appeal, holding that its infringement claim regarding the "DAKSHIN" trademark was not maintainable against the defendant's standalone Chennai restaurant. The court also found ITC failed to establish a prima facie case for passing off or copyright infringement.
Delhi High Court Upholds Rejection Of Swiss Company's Patent For Plastic Static Mixer
Case Title: Sulzer Mixpac AG v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
Case Number: LPA 545/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 647
On July 1, the Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a patent application for a plastic static mixer used to mix molten polymers. The court ruled that the invention lacked an inventive step and was a "mere modification" based on the company's own earlier patents and prior art.
Case Title: Raghav Chadha v. Ashok Kumar John Doe and Ors.
Case Number: I.A. 14417/2026 IN + CS(OS) 466/2026 & I.A. 14417/2026, I.A. 14418/2026, I.A. 14419/2026, I.A. 14420/2026, I.A. 14421/2026, I.A. 14422/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 645
The Delhi High Court on June 30 ordered the removal of six "profane and vulgar" AI-generated posts against MP Raghav Chadha. However, the court declined to block other impugned content, classifying it as permissible political satire rather than defamation.
Case Title: Saregama India Limited v. Black Madras Films & Ors.
Case Number: I.A. 30776/2025 and I.A. 4553/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 649
On July 1, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela made absolute an injunction in a copyright suit concerning the song Naguva Nayana. The makers of the film "Mask" were confirmed to be required to either remove the song or deposit ₹30 lakh before any OTT release.
Case Title: Saregama India Limited v. Mr. Ilaiyaraaja
Case Number: I.A. 4116/2026 and I.A. 6361/2026 In CS(COMM)-143/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 648
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela upheld an interim injunction restraining composer Ilaiyaraaja from exploiting or licensing music from 134 films on July 1. The ruling follows a copyright suit by Saregama India Limited, which claims ownership over the compositions.
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Case Title: Institute For Technology And Management Trust and Anr. v. Putch Venkata Ramana & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3128 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 102 OF 2015
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 367
The Bombay High Court has held that the Registrar of Trade Marks can be regarded as a court subordinate to the High Court for the purpose of transferring pending trademark rectification proceedings. The ruling allowed the Institute for Technology and Management Trust (ITM) to transfer three rectification proceedings to the High Court to be heard alongside a related trademark suit and 17 other connected matters.
Case Title: Shailesh R. Gandhi & Ors. v. Late Ramchandra R. Gandhi & Ors.
Case Number: COMM ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.18386 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(BOM) 363
The Bombay High Court granted interim protection to the "Bombay Group" branch of the Gandhi family, restraining the "Ahmedabad Group" from interfering with their use of the "Vadilal" trademark in specific southern and western states. Justice Amit Borkar held that the group had established a prima facie case to continue using the mark in Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana pending the outcome of arbitration regarding a family settlement.
KERALA HIGH COURT
Commercial Court Must Transfer Design Suit Once Validity Is Challenged: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Aines Food & Beverages & Ors. v. Abdulla Muhammed Sali
Case Number: OP(C) No. 147 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(KER) 120
On June 30, the Kerala High Court held that a Commercial Court loses jurisdiction over a design infringement suit as soon as a defense challenging the design's validity is raised. Justice T.R. Ravi ruled that such suits must be immediately transferred to the High Court under Section 22(4) of the Designs Act.
Case Title: [Proprietor of Malabar Fashion Jewellery] v. Malabar Gold
Case Number: Not provided in source
Citation: Not provided in source
The Kerala High Court set aside a trial court's finding of passing off against a Delhi-based jeweller, ruling that "Malabar" is a geographical expression that cannot be monopolized by Malabar Gold. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., however, maintained an injunction against the use of a deceptively similar trademark.
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Madras High Court Allows Dynamic Blocking Of Pirated Content of YRF's 'Alpha' Starring Alia Bhatt
Case Title: Yash Raj Films Pvt Ltd v. Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.
Case Number: OA Nos. 652 and 653 of 2026 in C.S(COMM DIV) No. 183 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 165
The Madras High Court on July 3 granted an ad-interim injunction and permitted the dynamic blocking of pirated online content for the upcoming movie "Alpha". Justice K. Kumaresh Babu allowed the protection of the film's copyright ahead of its theatrical release
Case Title: Padmavathi Films v. Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors. and Base Industries Group v. Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors.
Case Number: OA Nos. 623 & 624 of 2026 in C.S(COMM DIV) NO.176 of 2026 and OA Nos. 621 & 622 of 2026 in C.S(COMM DIV) NO.175 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 162 and 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 163
The Madras High Court has granted ad-interim injunctions restraining internet service providers and cable TV operators from infringing the copyright of two films ahead of their theatrical release. The films are the Kannada movie "Balaramana Dinagalu," starring Vinod Prabhakar and Priya Anand, and the Hindi comedy "Welcome to the Jungle," headlined by Akshay Kumar. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu passed separate common orders in each case on June 25, 2026, a day before both films were scheduled to hit theatres on June 26, 2026.