One-Month Notice Before Suo Motu Trademark Cancellation Is Mandatory: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday made it clear that if the Registrar decides to cancel or rectify a trademark registration on his own initiative, the registered owner must first be given at least one month's notice under Rule 100(1) of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017. The Court emphasised that this is not a mere formality. The one-month notice requirement is mandatory and cannot be brushed aside by invoking principles such as estoppel. A Division Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om...

Delhi High Court Grants Levi Strauss Temporary Injunction Against Use of Its Iconic Pocket Tab Mark

The Delhi High Court has recently granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of US denim and apparel company Levi Strauss and Company, holding that it had made out a strong prima facie case for protection of its registered “Tab Device Mark” and that the balance of convenience lay in its favour.Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, in its order dated February 23, 2026, observed that the “cumulative effect” of the pleadings, trademark registrations and sales figures tilted the balance of convenience...

Delhi High Court Protects Swami Ramdev's Personality Rights, Restrains AI Deepfakes

The Delhi High Court has recently granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of yoga guru Swami Ramdev, restraining the unauthorised use of his name, voice, image, likeness and distinctive style in AI-generated deepfakes, fabricated endorsements and other commercial content. In an order dated February 18, 2026, Justice Jyoti Singh held that Ramdev had made out a prima facie case. The Court observed that the material placed on record showed exploitation of his personality rights. The...

Patent Revocation Petition Survives Even If Patent Expires By Efflux Of Time: Delhi High Court

Holding that revocation operates retrospectively and in rem, the Delhi High Court has ruled that expiry of a patent does not render a pending revocation petition infructuous. A Division Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla on Tuesday held “a revocation petition would be maintainable, and would continue to survive, even after the patent of which revocation is sought expires by efflux of time"The court further clarified that once revoked, the patent is “rendered...

Bombay High Court Restrains Use Of 'ZEKODOL-P', Finds It Deceptively Similar To IPCA's 'ZERODOL'

The Bombay High Court has granted a permanent injunction in favour of IPCA Laboratories Limited, restraining Rikon Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd from using the mark “ZEKODOL-P”, after holding that it infringes IPCA's registered trademark “ZERODOL” and amounts to passing off. Justice Arif S. Doctor, in a judgment pronounced on February 23, 2026, held that the impugned mark is “phonetically, visually and structurally almost identical” to the plaintiff's mark. The court also imposed a cost of Rs 15 Lakh...

Delhi High Court Questions 'Zora' Trademark Registration, Says Visually Similar To 'Zara'

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday questioned the Registrar of Trade Marks action allowing the registration of the mark “Zora,” observing that it is “visually, receptively similar beyond any doubt” to the global fashion brand “Zara”.The matter arises from a challenge filed by Industria De Diseño Textil, S.A., owner of the brand “Zara,” against an order of the Registrar of Trade Marks permitting registration of the mark “Zora” in Class 24, which covers textile goods and fabrics.Justice Jyoti...

Bombay High Court Permanently Injuncts 'SUPER ASIAN PLUS' Trademark In Asian Paints Suit

The Bombay High Court has granted a permanent injunction in favour of Asian Paints, holding that the use of the mark “SUPER ASIAN PLUS” was “entirely dishonest and actuated by bad faith” and amounted to trademark infringement and passing off. Justice Arif S. Doctor, on 20 February 2026 also directed three of the defendants to each pay Rs 3 lakh in compensatory costs.Asian Paints submitted that it had been using its house mark “ASIAN PAINTS” continuously since 1952 and the mark “ASIAN” since...

Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Injunction Protecting 'TOI' Mark Against Impersonating Social Media Accounts

The Delhi High Court has recently granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction to Bennett Coleman and Company Limited restraining the use of the marks TIMES OF INDIA, TOI MOVIES, TOI_MOVIES and TOIMOVIES_, or any identical or deceptively similar mark, by unauthorised social media account operators. The order was passed on February 20, 2026 by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. The court noted that “The Times of India” was recognised as a well-known trademark by the Trade Marks Registry in 2024. It held...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains 19 More Entities From Infringing JAQUAR Trademark

The Delhi High Court has recently extended an earlier ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Jaquar And Company Private Limited after impleading 22 additional entities, restraining 19 of them from using the trademark “JAQUAR”.The Court restrained them from using the mark and directed banks to freeze accounts opened in a deceptively similar name. The relief was originally granted on November 3, 2025. At that stage, the Court recorded that Jaquar And Company Private Limited, the Indian...

Public University Data Can Be Used If Not Disparaging: Delhi High Court Lifts Injunction Against EdTech Site

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday set aside a trial court order restraining an education-technology start-up from using the names, information, and details of two universities on its website, holding that it has a right to use publicly available information so long as it is not presented disparagingly. A single-judge bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that the respondents were “unable to make out a prima facie case” and termed it “an unconvincing argument” that rankings displayed on the...

Baba Ramdev Approaches Delhi High Court Over Deepfakes, Seeks Protection of Personality Rights

Yoga guru and Patanjali Ayurved co-founder Baba Ramdev has moved the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (February 17) seeking protection of his personality rights. The matter was listed before Justice Jyoti Singh and was briefly heard. It has now been kept for further hearing on Wednesday. Ramdev seeks an injunction against the unauthorised use of his name, likeness, voice and distinctive style of discourse on digital platforms. The plea targets “John Doe” defendants allegedly using artificial...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Deepika Padukone's 82°E From Using “Lotus Splash” Mark In Dispute With Lotus Herbals

The Delhi High Court has issued a temporary injunction restraining actress Deepika Padukone's DPKA Universal Consumer Ventures Private Limited, the entity behind the skincare brand 82°E, from manufacturing, advertising or selling its "Lotus Splash" facial cleanser until final disposal of the suit. The Division Bench comprising Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Vinod Kumar held that the use of the mark "Lotus Splash" by the defendants was not merely descriptive of an ingredient but was being...