LiveLawBiz IPR Weekly Digest: May 11 - May 17, 2026
Riya Rathore
18 May 2026 9:04 PM IST
SUPREME COURT
Supreme Court Refuses Flipkart Relief In MARQ Trademark Dispute, Gives 8 Weeks To Clear Stock
Case Title: Flipkart India Private Limited v. M/S Marc Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number: SLP(C) No. 16438/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz SC 192
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to interfere with orders restraining Flipkart from using the 'MARQ' trademark in its dispute with Marc Enterprises, but gave the company eight weeks to sell off existing products bearing the mark The Delhi High Court on April 10, 2026 had dismissed Flipkart's appeal and upheld the injunction in favour of Marc Enterprises. It held that “MARC” and “MARQ” were phonetically, structurally, and visually similar and likely to cause confusion among consumers.
HIGH COURTS
Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court Protects boAt Co-Founder Aman Gupta's Personality Rights From Online Misuse
Case Title: Aman Gupta v. John Doe/Ashok Kumar & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 462/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 476
The Delhi High Court has passed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining multiple entities from unauthorised use of Aman Gupta's name, voice, image, likeness, and persona, including through AI and deepfake technology. “The manner in which the defendants are exploiting his name, voice, persona, slogans, registered trade marks of the plaintiff positively assert the underlying fact of plaintiffs' personality which are exclusive to him and none else. At this stage, these qualities and the aforesaid attributes are sufficient for the Court to prima facie reach an opinion that the registered trade marks and the personality rights of the plaintiff are being infringed.”, the court observed.
Case Title: Trimurti Films Private Limited v. B62 Studios Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 378/2026
After mediation between the parties failed on May 6, T-Series on Monday told the Delhi High Court that the 1988 assignment agreement gave it broad rights in the underlying works of the Tridev song Oye Oye, including the right to use them in another film, as it defended the use of the track as Rang De Lal in Dhurandhar: The Revenge. Senior Counsel Akhil Sibal, appearing for T-Series, continued his submissions before Justice Tushar Rao Gedela by taking the court through the 1988 assignment agreement between Trimurti Films and T-Series.
Case Title: Cinefil Producers Performance Ltd. v. Hari Om Retail Private Limited
Case Number: CS(COMM) 486/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 480
The Delhi High Court has recently temporarily restrained an electronics retail chain from playing films from copyright society Cinefil Producers Performance Limited's repertoire at its Delhi stores without a licence. It has also directed the retailer to suspend satellite, cable, and internet-enabled transmission systems used for such screenings until it obtains a valid licence. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the order on May 7, 2026, in a suit filed by Cinefil Producers Performance Limited against Hari Om Retail Private Limited.
Delhi High Court Protects Select CityWalk, Bars Use of Deceptively Similar “Global CityWalk” Mark
Case Title: Select Citywalk Retail Private Limited & Anr. v. Garg Realtech Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 493/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 479
The Delhi High Court on 8 May granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining a real estate company from using the mark “Global CityWalk” for its proposed commercial project, holding that the impugned mark was deceptively similar to the registered trademarks of Select CityWalk. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, while allowing the application, restrained Garg Realtech from using the impugned mark pending adjudication of the suit.
Delhi High Court Upholds Rejection Of Patent Application For Counterfeit Product Detection System
Case Title: Arti Srivastava v. The Assistant Controller Of Patents
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 252/2022
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 483
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal against the rejection of a patent application for a counterfeit product detection system, holding that the invention failed to meet statutory disclosure requirements because the complete specification did not sufficiently explain how it would actually work. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, in a judgment delivered on May 11, held that while the invention proposed a consumer-friendly mechanism to verify genuine products using visible and hidden codes, the complete specification left critical operational details to be worked out by a person skilled in the art, which was impermissible under the Patents Act.
Case Title: Hanmi Pharm. Co. Ltd. v. The Controller General Of Patents And Designs
Case Number: C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 464/2022
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 484
The Delhi High Court has set aside a Controller of Patents order refusing South Korean pharmaceutical company Hanmi Pharm Co. Ltd.'s patent application for a pharmaceutical compound and its manufacturing process, finding that the Controller had entirely failed to consider the process claims submitted by the applicant. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, in an order dated May 11, 2026, remanded the matter to the Patent Office for fresh consideration. The Court directed that Hanmi Pharm be given a fresh hearing before any decision is taken on the application.
Delhi High Court Questions Merchandiser's Authority To Sell Akkineni Nagarjuna-Branded T-Shirts
Case Title: Akkineni Nagarjuna v. WWW.BFXXX.Org & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) - 1023/2025
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday questioned a merchandise seller's claim that it was lawfully selling Akkineni Nagarjuna-branded T-shirts, after the defendant admitted it had no direct agreement with either the actor or the production house and could not immediately produce documents establishing its claimed authority. The exchange took place before Justice Tushar Rao Gedela in veteran Telugu actor Akkineni Nagarjuna's personality rights suit against entities allegedly using his name, image, and persona without authorisation.
Case Title: Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited vs Jiostar India Private Limited
Case Number: CS(COMM) 475/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 491
The Delhi High Court has recently granted ad-interim relief to Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited in its copyright suit against JioStar India Private Limited, while also referring the parties to mediation to explore an amicable settlement. The court directed JioStar to ensure that it does not use, publish, broadcast, stream, upload, or make copies of Zee's licensed works within 15 days in a dispute over the alleged continued hosting of content after expiry of licensing agreements.
Delhi HC Grants Temporary Relief To Universal City Studios Against PlayIMDb, StreamIMDb Pirate Sites
Case Title: Universal City Studios Productions LLLP vs PlayIMDb.Com & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 492/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 492
The Delhi High Court has recently granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of Universal City Studios Productions LLLP against several alleged rogue streaming websites, including playimdb.com and streamimdb.ru, which were accused of facilitating unauthorized streaming of copyrighted films such as Fast X, F9: The Fast Saga, and The Secret Life of Pets 2.
Delhi High Court Directs Meta To Take Down Ads Using StoryTV Content To Promote Bullet App
Case Title: Greenhorn Wellness Private Limited v. Zbullet Enterprises Limited & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 496/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 496
The Delhi High Court has temporarily restrained the entities allegedly behind misleading online advertisements from using StoryTV's copyrighted content and marks to promote rival short-drama app Bullet. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the order on May 11, 2026, in a suit filed by Greenhorn Wellness Private Limited, which owns and operates StoryTV. The Court also directed Meta to immediately take down the identified infringing advertisements across Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, Threads, Audience Network, and other platforms under its control.
Delhi High Court Restrains Sale Of Crompton's Grace Ceiling Fans In Orient Design Infringement Suit
Case Title: Orient Electric Limited v. Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited
Case Number: CS(COMM) 331/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 498
The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted an interim injunction in favour of Orient Electric Limited, restraining Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited from dealing in its 'Grace' series of ceiling fans after finding a prima facie case of infringement of Orient's registered ceiling fan design. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, after physically examining both the rival products in court, held that the visual similarity between the two fans was “unmistakable” and noted that Crompton had nowhere in its reply denied that its design was similar to Orient's registered design.
Delhi High Court Upholds Interim Injunction Against Geeta Publishing House Over Subhash Dey Books
Case Title: Geeta Publishing House vs Subhash Dey
Case Number: FAO (COMM) 152/2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 495
The Delhi High Court has recently upheld a District Judge's refusal to vacate an interim injunction restraining Geeta Publishing House from publishing, selling, revising, editing, circulating, or advertising Subhash Dey's Business Studies books for Classes XI and XII, or any other books authored by him. It held that the dispute over whether the publishing agreement was validly terminated must be decided at trial.
Delhi High Court Restrains Use Of Protex, Protrilex Marks In Danone's Protinex Trademark Suit
Case Title: Danone Asia Pacific Holdings Pte. Ltd. v. M/S Rockwell Pharmaceuticals & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 905/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 503
The Delhi High Court has decreed Danone's trademark infringement suit against Rockwell Pharmaceuticals, Deepali Enterprises, Vikas Nutrisciences Private Limited, Ankit Arora, and Deepak Arora, holding that their use of the marks 'Protex' and 'Protrilex' for nutritional products infringed Danone's registered 'Protinex' trademark.
Bombay High Court
Case Title: Bharat Bhogilal Patel v. M/s. TVS Electronics Ltd.
Case Number: NOTICE OF MOTION CD NO. 820 OF 2018 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION CD NO. 1604 OF 2019 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 359 OF 2017
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 289
The Bombay High Court has refused to throw out patent infringement suits over laser marking and engraving technology filed by inventor Bharat Bhogilal Patel against TVS Electronics Limited and Kalelkar Surgicals Private Limited, holding that the dispute must go to trial. The court also imposed ₹1 lakh costs on both.
Case Title: Asian Paints Limited v. Namgial Enterprise & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 16993 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 16992 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 291
The Bombay High Court has restrained the circulation of a Berger Paints advertisement comparing its Easy Clean product with an Asian Paints paint, after finding a prima facie case of product disparagement and flagging a meme in the clip that exclaimed “Fraud!”. Justice Arif S. Doctor held that a “clear case of disparagement” was made out. The ad-interim order was passed on May 8 in a commercial intellectual property suit filed by Asian Paints Limited against Namgial Enterprise and others, including Berger Paints India Limited.
Case Title: Harukado Co Ltd & Anr. v. Gautam Sanjay Mane & Ors.
Case Number: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 5602 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 4928 OF 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 294
The Bombay High Court has granted an interim injunction against several online retailers and importer Gautam Sanjay Mane, who were accused of selling "CARALL" car perfume products on e-commerce platforms without authorisation from trademark owner Harukado Co. Ltd. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh's May 7 order extended protection that had earlier been granted on April 29 to the remaining parties, none of whom appeared before the court or filed a response despite being served.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Gourdas Saha & Anr. v. Dipankar Majumdar
Case Number: F.M.A. 25 of 2026, IA No: CAN 1 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 116
The Calcutta High Court has recently set aside an interim injunction granted without hearing the publishers in a dispute over authorship of two chapters in a Chemistry textbook, holding that the plaintiff's suit could not be entertained as an ordinary declaratory action since its core claim arose from alleged copyright rights. A division bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury held, “The foundation of the suit is comprised of rights flowing from the Copyright Act, 1957, thus, coming within the purview of Section 2(1)(c)(xvii) of the Commercial Courts Act, particularly since, as per the valuation of the suit disclosed in the plaint itself, it is above the “specified value” stipulated for the City Civil Court at Calcutta.”
Calcutta High Court Upholds Rejection Of Suit For Skipping Mediation Under Commercial Courts Act
Case Title: Indian Explosives Pvt Ltd v. Ideal Detonators Pvt Ltd & Ors.
Case Number: APD/13/2023 WITH CS/48/2023
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 117
The Calcutta High Court on 5 May dismissed the appeal filed by Indian Explosives Pvt. Ltd., upholding the order rejecting its suit for non-compliance with Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. A Division Bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi held that courts cannot permit parties to bypass the mandatory pre-institution mediation requirement on vague or unsupported claims of urgency, and that a dispensation once granted can be revisited where the circumstances justify such scrutiny.
Himachal Pradesh High Court
Case Title: Geobrugg AG v. Techfab (India) Industries Limited
Case Number: OMP No. 343 of 2025 in Civil Suit No. 23 of 2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (HP) 16
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has refused to throw out a patent infringement suit filed by Swiss company Geobrugg AG against Indian manufacturer Techfab (India) Industries Limited. The suit alleges that Techfab infringed its patented wire mesh technology used to protect against rockfalls, landslides, and avalanches. Justice Sandeep Sharma rejected Techfab's plea seeking dismissal of the suit at the threshold. Techfab had argued that the case was filed in the wrong court, that the buyer of the product should also have been made a party, and that Geobrugg should have first gone through pre-institution mediation under the Commercial Courts Act.
Jharkhand High Court
Jharkhand High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Garhwa Shop Owner In Duplicate Castrol Oil Case
Case Title: Ravindra Kumar Kashyap v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Number: A. B. A. No. 2088 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (JHAR) 10
The Jharkhand High Court on 12 May reiterated that anticipatory bail may be granted where the circumstances and record justify protection from arrest, while considering an application arising from allegations of stocking duplicate motor oil. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi granted anticipatory bail to Ravindra Kumar Kashyap, an automobile shop owner from Garhwa, who had been booked under Sections 318(4) and 349 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with Sections 63 and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Madras High Court
Case Title: Tips Films Limited v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr.
Case Number: Original Application Nos.428 & 429 of 2026 in C.S.(Comm Div) No.136 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 128
The Madras High Court has restrained unauthorised broadcast of Tips Films' upcoming Varun Dhawan-starrer Hindi film 'Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai' after the company apprehended copyright infringement ahead of its May 22 release. Justice P.B. Balaji passed the ruling on May 6.
Patna High Court
Case Title: Prashant Kishor v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Case Number: Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.271 of 2020
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC(PAT) 11
The Patna High Court has quashed an FIR against political strategist Prashant Kishor in a case over allegations that he used campaign materials claimed as intellectual property by Shashwat Gautam, a data analytics professional associated with the Indian National Congress. The court held that criminal law cannot be invoked merely by invoking the phrase “intellectual property” where the allegations do not disclose any offense. The bench further found that the material claimed by Gautam was substantially derived from publicly available sources.
Commercial Courts
Delhi High Court Imposes ₹2 Lakh Cost On Dior, Dismisses 'Poison Pot' Trademark Suit
Case Title: Parfums Christian Dior v. M/s. Maja Health Care Division & Ors.
Case Number: CS (COMM) 355/2019
A Delhi district court has dismissed a trademark infringement suit filed by luxury French perfume house Parfums Christian Dior against Indian cosmetics maker Maja Health Care Division and two others over the 'Poison Pot' mark. The court held that Dior failed to establish its legal identity and proper authorisation to sue. It also failed to prove infringement and passing off on their merits.