LiveLawBiz IPR Weekly Digest: March 01 - March 07, 2026
Riya Rathore
9 March 2026 9:30 AM IST
HIGH COURTS
Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Reviving Opposition To IBM's “TIVOLI” Trademark Application
Case Title: International Business Machines Corporation v. Tivoli Gardens & Anr.
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 45/2025 & IA Nos.19415/2025 & 26937/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 214
The Delhi High Court has recently set aside an order of the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks that permitted Tivoli Gardens to revive its opposition to International Business Machines Corporation's application for registration of the mark “TIVOLI”. Justice Tejas Karia allowed IBM's appeal. The court held that the statutory timeline for filing evidence in support of opposition admits of no discretion.
Case Title: Dr Aniruddha Dhairyadhar Joshi Through Power Of Attorney Holder v. John Does Ashok Kumars & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 178/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 215
Calling the threat to his image “real and present”, the Delhi High Court has protected Maharashtra-based spiritual leader Dr Aniruddha Dhairyadhar Joshi's Persinlaity Rights Against AI-generated deepfakes. The court restrained the unauthorized use of his name, voice, and persona and ordered Google, Meta and X to take down infringing content within 48 hours and disclose subscriber information of those responsible. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the ex-parte ad-interim injunction on February 24, observing that the plaintiff had established a strong prima facie case. “The dent and damage to the image and personality of the plaintiff, prima facie, appears to be real and present,” the court said.
Delhi High Court Finds 'Huge Counterfeiting Operation', Awards ₹2.5 Lakh Damages To HUL, P&G
Case Title: Hindustan Lever Ltd. & Anr. v. Rakesh Goyal & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 256/2018
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 216
The Delhi High Court has recently decreed a trademark infringement suit in favour of Hindustan Lever Ltd. (now HUL) and another plaintiff, a subsidiary of Procter & Gamble Company, USA, awarding Rs 2,50,000 in damages against individuals found to be engaged in counterfeiting fast-moving consumer goods. In a judgment delivered on February 28, 2026, Justice Tejas Karia held that the defendants were running a “huge counterfeiting operation” involving fake shampoos, creams, detergents and other FMCG products sold under the plaintiffs' well-known marks.
Case Title: Britannia Industries Ltd v. Desi Bites Snacks P Ltd & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 983/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 217
The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a plea seeking initiation of perjury proceedings against Britannia Industries Ltd and its authorised representative in a trademark dispute over the mark “GOOD DAY”. The plea was filed by Desibites Snacks Pvt Ltd and its director. The applicants alleged that Britannia had falsely stated on oath that it first became aware of their products only in the third week of October 2024. They also alleged that Britannia suppressed the fact that it had filed a rectification petition in 2018 against a trademark registration for “GOOD DAY” held by the director of Desi Bites, Roop Chand Agarwal, for papad.
Case Title: Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. Zee Laboratories Limited
Case Number: CS(COMM) 896/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 219
Calling it “a case of triple identity,” the Delhi High Court has restrained Zee Laboratories from using the marks 'FEXIT', 'FEXIT-B' and 'FEXIT-M', holding them deceptively similar to GlaxoSmithKline's registered antibiotic brand 'PHEXIN'. Justice Tejas Karia passed the order on February 28, 2026, on an interim application by GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. seeking restraint against infringement of its mark 'PHEXIN', passing off, unfair competition and dilution.
Delhi High Court Bars Groundless Copyright Threats Against TV9 Over Brief Use Of Third-Party Footage
Case Title: Associated Broadcasting Company Limited v. Google LLC & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 9/2024 & I.A. 260/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 227
The Delhi High Court has declared that certain TV9 Network news videos uploaded on its YouTube channels do not infringe the copyright of third parties and restrained four foreign entities from issuing further groundless copyright threats against the broadcaster. The videos covered events such as Hurricane Laura in the United States, heavy snowfall and floods, the Israel–Hamas conflict, and the 2023 Chinese balloon incident.
Delhi High Court Upholds Rejection Of Crystal Crop's Herbicidal Composition Patent
Case Title: Crystal Crop Protection Ltd v. Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs & Ors.
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 19/2023 & I.A. 20715/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 228
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Crystal Crop Protection Ltd., upholding a decision by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs to reject a patent application for a herbicidal composition designed for field crops. Justice Tejas Karia upheld the Assistant Controller's finding that the proposed invention lacked an inventive step and fell under the statutory bar of Section 3(e) of the Patents Act, as it constituted a 'mere admixture' of known substances.
Delhi High Court Grants Interim Injunction To Novartis Against 'NOVIETS' For Trademark Infringement
Case Title: Novartis AG & Ors. Noviets Pharma & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 218/2024 & I.A. 24963/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 229
The Delhi High Court on 28 February granted an interim injunction in favour of the global healthcare company Novartis, restraining several Bihar-based entities, including Noviets Pharma and Noviets Veterinary Private Limited, from using the marks 'NOVIETS' and its associated logos. Justice Tejas Karia observed that the contested marks were deceptively similar to the well-known 'NOVARTIS' trademark and logo, noting a likelihood of confusion among the public.
Case Title: Radico Khaitan Ltd v. Mohit Petrochemical Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number: C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 131/2025 & I.A. 13752/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 230
The Delhi High Court recently allowed a rectification petition filed by Radico Khaitan Ltd., formerly Rampur Distillery & Chemical Company Ltd., directing the removal and cancellation of the 'GRAND MASTI' trademark registration held by Mohit Petrochemical Pvt. Ltd. from the Trade Marks Register. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, in a judgment delivered on 27 February 2026, observed that the registered mark was deceptively similar to Radico Khaitan's established 'MASTIH' brand, in use since 1969.
Case Title: Mankind Consumer Products Private Limited v. Anondita Medicare Limited & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 184/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 233
The Delhi High Court has recently granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Mankind Consumer Products Private Limited, restraining Anondita Medicare Limited and the other entities behind the impugned Instagram pages from using social media content that allegedly copies the original artistic works and taglines of its popular 'MANFORCE' condom brand. On February 25, 2026, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that a side-by-side comparison of the Instagram posts “clearly would depict, prima facie, infringement of the copyrights of the plaintiff.” The Court said the material on record showed an “almost complete and identical imitation of the original artistic works and the tagline” of the plaintiff.
Delhi High Court Says Patent Amendments Permissible At Appellate Stage, Sets Aside Daikin Refusal
Case Title: Daikin Industries Ltd v. Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 56/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 237
The Delhi High Court on 26 February reiterated that patent amendments are permissible even at the appellate stage, so long as they fall within the statutory framework of the Patents Act. Justice Jyoti Singh partially allowed the appeal filed by Daikin Industries Ltd, setting aside the Patent Office order that had earlier denied the company a patent for its 'Shell-And-Plate Heat Exchanger.'
Case Title: Fertin Pharma A/S v. Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 25/2023
CITATION: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 238
The Delhi High Court on 18 February set aside an order by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs that had rejected a patent application from Fertin Pharma A/S, observing that the regulator failed to provide the requisite reasoning expected of a quasi-judicial authority. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that the original refusal was “cryptic,” whereas reasoning is “the bedrock of all orders, including those passed by quasi-judicial authorities.”
Delhi High Court Bars Ex-Franchisee From Using 'Moti Mahal' Trademark After Franchise Termination
Case Title: Moti Mahal Legendary Hospitality Through Its Sole Proprietor & Anr. v. M/S Sant Foods Through Its Proprietor Mr Ravi Gupta & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 189/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 240
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of Moti Mahal Legendary Hospitality, restraining Sant Foods, a former franchisee, from using the “MOTI MAHAL” trademark after the termination of their commercial agreement. The Court observed that once a franchise agreement is terminated, the former franchisee retains no legal right to operate a restaurant using the trademarked name.
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Refusal Of Jindal Steel's 'JSP' Trademark, Orders Fresh Consideration
Case Title: Jindal Steel Limited v. Registrar Of Trade Marks
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 75/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 241
The Delhi High Court has partially allowed an appeal filed by Jindal Steel Limited against an order of the Registrar of Trade Marks refusing registration of the trademark “JSP,” holding that the decision was a “non-speaking order” passed without considering the arguments and material placed on record. In a judgment delivered on February 17, 2026, Justice Jyoti Singh observed that the Registrar had failed to consider several issues raised by the company, including its reliance on Sections 34 and 55 of the Trade Marks Act.
Bombay High Court
Patent Examination Cannot Be Skipped Due To Pre-Grant Opposition: Bombay High Court
Case Title: AIC246 AG & Co. KG v. The Patent Office of India & Ors.
Case Number: COMM. MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 72 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 109
The Bombay High Court has set aside the rejection of a fungicide patent application, reiterating that examination proceedings under the Patents Act cannot be bypassed merely because a pre-grant opposition is pending. In a judgment delivered on February 27, Justice Arif S. Doctor held that the Controller acted “plainly arbitrary, unexplained, and contrary to the statutory scheme of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder” by cancelling a scheduled examination hearing, assuring the applicant that a fresh hearing would be granted, and then rejecting the patent application without granting that hearing.
Bombay High Court Temporarily Bars Delhi Hospital From Infringing 'SAIFEE HOSPITAL' Mark
Case Title: Saifee Hospital Trust v. Saifi Hospital Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 41547 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 41524 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 110
The Bombay High Court has recently granted ad-interim relief to Saifee Hospital Trust, restraining a Delhi-based company from infringing its registered trademark “SAIFEE HOSPITAL” after finding that the rival mark “SAIFI HOSPITAL” is “visually, structurally and phonetically deceptively similar”. In an order dated February 10, Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh observed that the defendant company, Saifi Hospital Private Limited, was offering similar medical services under the impugned mark even though the trust is the registered proprietor of the word mark.
Calcutta High Court
Calcutta High Court Protects 'SWASTIK' Rice Label Against Deceptive Packaging By Competitor
Case Title: Jay Baba Bakreswar Rice Mill Private Limited v. Deepak Kumar Barnwal
Case Number: IP-COM/59/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 63
The Calcutta High Court has decreed a suit in favour of Jay Baba Bakreswar Rice Mill Private Limited against an individual, Deepak Kumar Barnwal, over the use of the “SWASTIK” label mark for rice products. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur observed that the respondent's packaging was “strikingly similar and deceptively identical” to that of the petitioner and held that the rival marks appeared to be identical.
Case Title: Neelam Gupta v. Esme Consumer Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: IA NO. GA-COM/1/2025 In IP-COM/47/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 65
The Calcutta High Court has recently observed that once the proprietor of a trademark or copyright institutes an infringement suit with due diligence, the cause of action in a suit alleging groundless threats automatically extinguishes. On January 30, 2026, Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur dismissed a 'threat suit' filed by Neelam Gupta against Esme Consumer Private Limited because the company had, subsequent to the filing of the suit, commenced a formal infringement action in a Delhi court.
Orissa High Court
Orissa High Court Allows Application For Patent Restoration As Expiry Was Within Covid-19 Period
Case Title: M/S.Green Energy Resources v. Union Of India & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) No.19128 of 2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(ORI) 12
The Orissa High Court on 12 February, allowed a writ petition filed by Green Energy Resources, a Sambalpur-based firm, permitting it to apply for the restoration of a patent that had ceased to have effect due to the non-payment of renewal fees. Justice B.P. Routray observed that the company's explanation for the lapse was convincing and noted that the patent's expiry occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court remarked that under the given facts, there was “no difficulty... for considering the application of the Petitioner for restoration of the Patent by the Controller”.
Madras High Court
Madras High Court Rejects Lahari Recording's Claim Over Satellite Telecast of Telugu-Dubbed 'Roja'
Case Title: Lahari Recording Co. P. Ltd. v. Jain Television (Mala Publicity Service P Ltd) & Ors.
Case Number: OSA No. 206 of 2016 and OSA No.207 of 2016
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 64
The Madras High Court has dismissed appeals filed by Lahari Recording Co. Pvt. Ltd. over the satellite telecast of the Telugu-dubbed version of Roja, the Mani Ratnam-directed Tamil film that became one of Indian cinema's most recognisable titles of the 1990s. The company had sought to block the broadcast and claim Rs 1 crore in damages, arguing that the telecast infringed its rights in the dubbed version.
Madras High Court Protects '777 Oil' Trademark, Sets Aside Order Dismissing Infringement Suit
Case Title: M/s. J.R.K's Research and Pharmaceuticals Pvt.Ltd v. M/s. Sanjeevi Pharma
Case Number: OSA(CAD) No. 1 of 2025 & C.M.P.No. 7 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 65
The Madras High Court on Friday protected the trademark “777 Oil” used for a Siddha medicinal oil to treat psoriasis, setting aside a single judge's decision that had dismissed an infringement suit filed by J.R.K's Research and Pharmaceuticals against Sanjeevi Pharma. In a judgment pronounced on March 6, 2026, Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice K. Kumaresh Babu allowed the company's appeal, holding that the earlier judgment suffered from “perversity,” and decreed the suit with a permanent injunction restraining Sanjeevi Pharma from using the mark “777 Oil” or any deceptively similar mark.
Karnataka High Court
Case Title: Wacom Company Limited v. Cirel Systems Private Limited
Case Number: CIVIL PETITION NO.426 OF 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (KAR) 29
The Karnataka High Court has recently allowed Japanese technology firm Wacom Company Limited to collect documents and testimony from Bengaluru-based semiconductor manufacturer Cirel Systems Pvt Ltd. The evidence will be used in a patent infringement lawsuit pending in the United States between Wacom and Chinese company Shenzhen Qianfenyi Intelligent Technology Co Ltd, in which the Indian firm is not a party.