LiveLawBiz IPR Weekly Digest: October 26 - October 31, 2026
Riya Rathore
2 Nov 2026 1:21 PM IST
DELHI HIGH COURT
Case Title: Utracon Corporation Pte Ltd v. Ucon PT Structural System Private Limited & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 661/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1189
The Delhi High Court referred a trademark infringement and passing off suit filed by Singapore-based Utracon Corporation against its former Indian subsidiary and others to arbitration. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that a party cannot avoid an arbitration agreement merely by including a claim for relief that may not independently be arbitrable. The dispute concerned the continued use of the UTRACON trademark after the licence expired.
Case Title: M/s Cafe Brown Sugar Pvt. Ltd. v. Vyom Foodcraft Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1008/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1188
The Delhi High Court rejected Cafe Brown Sugar's application to place additional documents on record in its trademark dispute with Vyom Foodcraft and Richa Jalani. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that the company had failed to establish reasonable cause for the late filing, observing that the documents had remained in its own godown and storerooms when the suit was filed. The Court rejected the explanation that the documents were discovered during Diwali cleaning.
Delhi High Court Restrains Agro Orbit Hub From Selling Unauthorised Products Bearing UPL Trademarks
Case Title: UPL Limited & Anr. v. Agro Orbit Hub Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1130/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1168
The Delhi High Court temporarily restrained Agro Orbit Hub Private Limited from selling or advertising unauthorised products bearing UPL's trademarks. Justice Tejas Karia directed the platform to remove the disputed listings within 72 hours of receiving the order and disclose details of the sellers and others involved in the supply chain.
Delhi High Court Restrains Plywood Sellers From Using Goldmedal Mark To Exploit Brand Goodwill
Case Title: Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd. v. Jimmy Thoppilan & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 445/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1169
The Delhi High Court restrained Jimmy Thoppilan and others from manufacturing, selling or advertising plywood, block boards, PVC boards and related goods under the mark “GOLDMEDAL PLY AND BOARDS” or any deceptively similar mark. Justice Tejas Karia observed that the defendants had prima facie adopted the mark dishonestly to exploit Goldmedal Electricals' goodwill and reputation.
Delhi High Court Restrains Antara Resort From Using Mark Similar To Minor Hotel Group's “ANANTARA”
Case Title: MHG IP Holding Singapore Pte Ltd & Ors. v. Antara Resorts and Banquets
Case Number: CS(COMM) 1155/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1182
The Delhi High Court restrained Antara Resort and Banquets from using “ANTARA”, “ANTARA RESORT & BANQUETS” or deceptively similar marks for hospitality services. Justice Tejas Karia found a prima facie case of trademark infringement, noting the similarity between the rival marks, overlapping services and common trade channels. The Court observed that the defendant's adoption appeared to be an attempt to exploit the plaintiffs' goodwill and reputation.
Delhi High Court Bars Jabsons Foods From Using 'HOT MIX' Mark, Upholds Shah Namkeen's Rights
Case Title: Mr. Sunit Shah, Proprietor of M/s Shah Namkeen v. M/s Jabsons Foods Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 641/2024
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 1180
The Delhi High Court continued an injunction restraining Jabsons Foods from using the “HOT MIX” mark for namkeen and allied products. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that adding the defendant's house mark or changing the packaging did not overcome the use of the expression that formed the prominent feature of Shah Namkeen's registered label. The Court dismissed Jabsons' application to vacate the injunction, while clarifying that the company could use the words “hot” or “mix” individually in their ordinary descriptive sense.
Case Title: Sourav Ganguly & Anr. v. Masha Sajdeh & Ors.
Case Number: Not verified from the available article listing
Citation: Not verified from the available article listing
The Delhi High Court directed former Indian cricket captain Sourav Ganguly to identify the scenes in the film Doosra that he objects to, along with timestamps and reasons for each objection. Justice Tejas Karia asked Ganguly's side to provide the details before the Court considers whether to grant interim relief in his personality rights dispute with the filmmakers.
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Bombay High Court Orders Takedown Of Video Claiming Bisleri Bottles Filtered Drain, Toilet Water
Case Title: Bisleri International Private Limited v. Meta Platforms Inc. & Ors.
Case Number: Interim Application (L) No. 37662 of 2026 in Suit (L) No. 37659 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 619
The Bombay High Court directed the removal of social media posts alleging that Bisleri's packaged drinking water was made from filtered drain and toilet water. Justice Arif S. Doctor described the video as prima facie disparaging and denigrating and restrained further circulation of the allegations. The Court also granted a dynamic injunction covering substantially identical or similar versions of the video circulated through newly created accounts or URLs.
Bombay High Court Protects Natural Ice Creams From Fake Franchise Offers By Impersonators
Case Title: Siddhant Ice Creams LLP & Anr. v. John Doe(s) & Ors.
Case Number: Interim Application (L) No. 22104 of 2026 in Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 328 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 607
The Bombay High Court granted ad-interim relief to Siddhant Ice Creams LLP and another plaintiff in a trademark and copyright infringement suit concerning alleged impersonation of the NATURAL Ice Creams brand. The plaintiffs alleged that unknown persons had created websites, emails and other communications resembling the brand and issued forged franchise letters to solicit payments from prospective franchisees.
Bombay High Court Allows USV Chairperson Leena Gandhi Tewari To Sue Over Fake Facebook Accounts
Case Title: Leena Gandhi Tewari v. John Deo/Ashok Kumar & Ors.
Case Number: Leave Petition (L) No. 36393/2026 in Suit (L) No. 36383/2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 600
The Bombay High Court granted USV Private Limited Chairperson Leena Gandhi Tewari permission to institute a suit against Meta Platforms Inc. and others over allegedly fake Facebook accounts impersonating her. Justice Rajesh S. Patil granted leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent after Tewari alleged that the accounts misused her identity, photographs and professional information without consent.
Bombay High Court Finds 'LEFOXIN BIOX' Similar To Glaxo's 'LANOXIN', Directs Removal By December 31
Case Title: Glaxo Group Limited v. Shreya Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number: Commercial Miscellaneous Petition No. 12 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 613
The Bombay High Court directed the removal of Shreya Life Sciences' “LEFOXIN BIOX” trademark from the register with effect from December 31, 2026. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan held that the marks could create a likelihood of confusion despite differences in the medicines' ingredients and medical uses. The Court also held that manufacturing goods in India exclusively for export constitutes trademark use in India under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Pre-Institution Mediation Not Mandatory In Trademark Suits Seeking Urgent Relief: M.P. High Court
Case Title: Naivedya Associates v. M/s Kriti Nutrients Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number: MISC. PETITION No. 2934 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MP) 75
The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed Naivedya Associates' petition challenging the maintainability of a trademark infringement suit filed by Kriti Nutrients Private Limited before the Commercial Court in Indore. A Division Bench of Justices Subodh Abhyankar and Jai Kumar Pillai held that pre-institution mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, was not mandatory where the suit contemplated urgent interim relief.
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Madras High Court Upholds Registration Of 'NICE' Mark Despite Dr Reddy's 'NISE' Trademark Objection
Case Title: Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited v. The Registrar of Trademarks & Anr.
Case Number: CMA(TM) No. 31 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 330
The Madras High Court upheld registration of the “NICE” trademark for neonatal medical equipment, rejecting Dr. Reddy's Laboratories' objection based on its “NISE” mark for medicines. Justice A.D. Maria Clete held that although the marks were phonetically similar, the differences between the products and their purchasers reduced the likelihood of confusion. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding that Dr. Reddy's had not established the requirements for refusing registration or for protection of a well-known trademark across different goods.
Madras High Court Restrains Thanjavur Restaurant From Using 'Sangethas' Name, Quotes Avvaiyar
Case Title: M/s. Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP v. M/s. Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg
Case Number: OA No. 673 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 333
The Madras High Court restrained Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg in Thanjavur from operating under the name “Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg Restaurant” or a similar name. Justice P.B. Balaji found that customers could mistake the restaurant for the Sangeetha Veg Restaurant chain. Referring to Tamil poet Avvaiyar's saying that hunger can make even the ten virtues disappear, the Court observed that customers might be drawn to the similar name without noticing differences in spelling or logos.
KERALA HIGH COURT
Kerala High Court Upholds Injunction On Greenmount's 'Brahmin Sambar Powder' In Wipro Trademark Case
Case Title: Greenmount Spices Private Limited v. Wipro Enterprises Private Limited
Case Number: FAO No. 95 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (KER) 205
The Kerala High Court upheld an interim injunction restraining Greenmount Spices from using “Brahmin Sambar Powder” on its products in a trademark dispute with Wipro Enterprises, which owns the Brahmins food products business. Justice C.S. Dias held that whether an expression describes a product or suggests a commercial association must be assessed in the context of the overall packaging. The Court dismissed Greenmount's appeal, finding that Wipro had established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favoured it.