TRADEMARK
How Can Trademark Registry Restrict Use Of A Mark Without Reasons, Gujarat High Court Orally Asks?
The Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 16) orally questioned the Registrar of Trademarks on why the adjudicating authority had permitted advertisement of a trademark in the Trademark Journal with restrictions, without recording any reasons for imposing such conditions. Justice Niral R. Mehta was hearing an appeal arising from a 2020 order of the trademark authority, which had conditionally accepted an application for registration of the “Family Farms” logo with the tagline “Ye Ghar Ki Baat...
Delhi High Court Refers 'BRO CODE' Trademark Dispute Between Indospirit and Ravi Mohan's Studio To Mediation
The Delhi High Court on Thursday referred a trademark infringement dispute between Indospirit Beverages Private Limited and actor Ravi Mohan's production house over the use of the title “BRO CODE” for an upcoming Tamil film to mediation before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the order on January 15, 2026, while hearing the matter arising from Indospirit's suit alleging infringement and passing off of its “BROCODE” trademark through the...
Delhi High Court Lifts Injunction On 'Cheetal' Rice Trademark, Rules No Infringement Of 'Double Deer' Mark
The Delhi High Court has set aside an interim injunction restraining Bhole Nath Foods Ltd., a Delhi-based rice manufacturer, from using the “CHEETAL” word and device marks, holding that no prima facie case of trademark infringement or passing off was made out in favour of Kirorimal Kashiram Marketing and Agencies Pvt. Ltd., the Chennai-based owner of the “DOUBLE DEER” mark for rice products.A Division Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla, by a judgment dated January 9,...
Delhi High Court Restrains “Charcha Aaj Ki” From Using Deceptively Similar Aaj Tak Device Mark
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Living Media India Limited, the company behind the Hindi news channel AAJ TAK. The Court restrained a digital news platform operating under the name “Charcha Aaj Ki” from using a device mark and colour combination found to be deceptively similar to the “AAJ TAK” trademark. In an order dated January 9, 2026, Justice Jyoti Singh held that Living Media had made out a prima facie case. The court directed that the...
IP Office Issues Public Notice Against Misleading Online Trademark Registration Platforms
The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) has issued a public notice warning businesses and individuals against online platforms that advertise and solicit clients by offering assured trademark registration services, terming such practices misleading and illegal.In the notice dated January 7, 2026, the CGPDTM said it has taken serious note of several entities engaging in the solicitation of prospective trademark applicants through digital platforms, in...
Madras High Court Temporarily Bars Use Of “URG-9”, Finds It Deceptively Similar To “ARG-9”
The Madras High Court has granted an interim injunction restraining Foregen Healthcare Ltd. from using the pharmaceutical mark “URG-9.” The court held that it was prima facie deceptively similar to the registered trademark “ARG-9” owned by Nouveau Medicament Private Limited.Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy passed the order on January 7, 2026, while deciding the interim injunction application in a trademark infringement and passing-off suit concerning pharmaceutical products.The court observed,...
Bombay High Court Restrains GetShaadi.com For Infringing Shaadi.com Trademark, Imposes ₹25 Lakh Costs
The Bombay High Court has permanently restrained the operators of www.getshaadi.com, a matrimonial and matchmaking website, holding that it infringes and passes off the trademark Shaadi.com.In a judgment delivered on January 6, 2026, Justice Arif S Doctor ruled in favour of People Interactive, which operates the popular matrimonial platform “Shaadi.com.” The court held that the rival operator's adoption and use of “getshaadi.com” for identical matrimonial and matchmaking services violated...
Delhi High Court Rejects Colgate Plea To Amend Suit Against Dabur Over Fluoride Ads
The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to allow Colgate-Palmolive to amend its 2019 plaint to specifically challenge Dabur's later newspaper advertisements, holding that fresh versions of an advertising campaign do not warrant repeated amendments when the issue is already pleaded.Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, in an order dated January 12, 2026, clarified that Colgate's 2019 plaint contains detailed allegations accusing Dabur of spreading misleading information and disparaging fluoride as...
Taj Hotels Secures Sound Mark Registration For Hospitality Services
Indian Hotels Company Limited (IHCL), a Tata Group company operating hospitality brands such as Taj, Vivanta, Ginger and SeleQtions, has secured trademark registration for the “Taj” sonic sound, marking the first instance of a sound mark being registered in the hospitality sector in India.According to the registration certificate, the sound mark was registered by the Trade Marks Registry on January 7, 2026, with a registration date of April 17, 2025 and is valid for a period of ten years. The...
“Tiger” Mark Common In Trade, Not Trademarkable: Delhi High Court Denies Relief To Farm Equipment Maker
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant interim relief to an agricultural equipment maker that sought to stop a rival from using the word “Tiger” as part of its brand name for farm implements. In a judgment delivered on January 9, 2026, Justice Tejas Karia of the Delhi High Court held that the words “Tiger” and “Brand” are common to the trade and that no case of deceptive similarity was made out at the interim stage.The court observed, “As 'TIGER' and 'BRAND' are found to be generic and...
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Trade Marks Registry Order Refusing Mankind Pharma's PETKIND Trademark
The Delhi High Court has overturned an order of the Trade Marks Registry refusing registration of Mankind Pharma Limited's trademark “PETKIND” for animal and agricultural products. The relief was earlier denied on the ground of similarity with an earlier “PETKIND” mark filed by Petkind Pet Products Inc.Justice Tejas Karia, by a judgment dated January 9, 2026, allowed the appeal filed by Mankind Pharma, holding that the refusal of the trademark was unjustified in view of the company's...