Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief To PhonePe In Trademark Infringement Suit, Says Contradictory Stands Taken On Meaning Of ‘Pe’

The Bombay High Court refused to grant interim relief to PhonePe for alleged infringement of its trademark “PhonePe” by Resilient Innovations’ trademark “postpe”. Justice Manish Pitale cited contradictions between PhonePe’s stand taken before the Delhi High Court and the Bombay High Court regarding the meaning of the term “Pe”. “It appears that the endeavour of the plaintiff is to claim that, 'pe' may connote 'payment' but, in its registered trademark, it refers to the colloquial...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief To PhonePe In Trademark Infringement Suit, Says Contradictory Stands Taken On Meaning Of ‘Pe’

The Bombay High Court refused to grant interim relief to PhonePe for alleged infringement of its trademark “PhonePe” by Resilient Innovations’ trademark “postpe”.Justice Manish Pitale cited contradictions between PhonePe’s stand taken before the Delhi High Court and the Bombay High Court regarding the meaning of the term “Pe”.“It appears that the endeavour of the plaintiff is to claim that, 'pe' may connote 'payment' but, in its registered trademark, it refers to the colloquial Hindi term 'on',...

Standard Essential Patent Owners Can Pray For Interim And Final Injunctive Relief If Infringer Deemed To Be An ‘Unwilling Licensee’: Delhi High Court

Foreign Jurisprudence On ‘Standard Essential Patent’ Has To Be Adapted In Indian Realities As India’s Judge Population Ratio Extremely Poor And Expeditious Disposal Of Patent Suits Not Expected: Delhi HC

YouTuber Dhruv Rathee To Remove 'Targeted' References To 'Real Fruit Juice' From His Video: Calcutta High Court Grants Interim Relief To Dabur

Dhruv Rathee's recent video analyzing the health effects of fruit juices has landed the YouTuber in a legal battle with Dabur, which claims that he specifically disparaged their packaged fruit products 'Real' juice.The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday granted interim relief to the company and directed Rathee to remove the offending portions from the video. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur observed:“Prima facie, at the ad interim stage even though the underlying intent of the impugned video may...

Vouchers Are Neither Goods Nor Services, No ITC Available To Myntra: AAAR

The Karnataka Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) has held that input tax credit (ITC) is not available on the vouchers and subscription packages procured by Myntra from third-party vendors.The two-member bench of Ranjana Jha and Shikha C. has relied on the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s Premier Sales Promotion Pvt Ltd versus Union of India & Ors., in which it was held that vouchers do not fall under the category of goods and services, and therefore, the...

MSMED Act 'Dues' Will Not Prevail Over SARFAESI Proceedings : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that the dues under Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 would not prevail over the SARFAESI Act.In this case, the Madhya Pradehs High Court held that MSMED Act will prevail over Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. According to the High Court, in view of Section 24 of the MSMED Act which provides that the provisions of Sections 15 to 23 of the MSMED Act would have overriding effect...

Party Who Was Not 'Supplier' On The Date Of Entering Into Contract Cannot Seek Any Benefit As Supplier Under MSMED Act : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a party who was not 'supplier' on the date of entering into contract cannot seek any benefit as the 'supplier' under the MSMED Act, 2006If any registration is obtained subsequently the same would have an effect prospectively and would apply to the supply of goods and rendering services subsequent to the registration, the bench of CJI UU Lalit and Justice Bela M. Trivedi observed.The bench was considering a batch of appeals which raised issues regarding interplay...

When Defendant's Trademark Is Identical To Plaintiff's Registered Trademark & Their Goods Or Services Are Identical, Confusion In Public Shall Be Presumed : Supreme Court

"In an infringement action, an injunction would be issued as soon as it is proved that the defendant is improperly using the trade mark of the plaintiff".

[Breaking] Compound Interest During Moratorium Period Can Be Waived For MSME & Personal Loans Up to Rs. 2 Crore: Centre Tells SC [Read Affidavit]

The Central Government on Friday informed the Supreme Court of its decision to waive compound interest during the six-month moratorium period, for MSME loans and personal loans up to Rs. 2 crore. The Union of India submitted that is has decided to continue the "tradition of handholding the small borrowers" and therefore, it has waived interest for the said period for the most "vulnerable category of borrowers" viz.: MSME loans up to Rs. 2 croreEducation loans up to Rs. 2 croreHousing...

Commercial Suits: 120 Days Deadline To File Written Statement Mandatory: SC [Read Judgment]

“In view of the fact that the consequence of forfeiting a right to file the written statement; non-extension of any further time; and the fact that the Court shall not allow the written statement to be taken on record all points to the fact that the earlier law on Order VIII Rule 1 on the filing of written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 has now been set at naught.”

Proprietor Of A Trade Mark Cannot Enjoy Monopoly Over The Entire Class Of Goods: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court in M/S. Nandhini Deluxe vs. Karnataka Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., has held that the proprietor of a trade mark cannot enjoy monopoly over the entire class of goods particularly when he is not using the said trade mark in respect of certain goods falling under the same class.Factual matrixKarnataka Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., which has been producing and selling milk and milk products, since 1985, obtained registration for their mark ‘NANDINI’....

Madras HC upholds Constitutional validity of S. 18 of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 [Read Judgment]

The High Court of Madras has upheld the Constitutional validity of Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006.The Court was hearing a petition filed by M/s. Refex Energy Limited. The company had placed three work orders with the respondent, M/s. Passive Infra Projects P. Limited for the supply of Galvanized Steel Structures/Solar Module Mounting Structures. Subsequent disagreements led to the filing of a claim petition under Section 18 of the MSMED Act, 2006...