Disclaimer

The web site is designed for general information purposes only and should not be construed to be formal legal advice. This website is not intended for any kind of solicitation or advertising.

In case you require any advice, you are requested to contact us before acting on any information. The firm takes no responsibility for any information that may be found not upto date/ incorrect/ insufficient. 

This website does not in any way establish or intend to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to be used as such an invitation for attorney-client relationship.

The viewer acknowledges that there has been no inducement, invitation or solicitation of any nature whatsoever from Aswal Associates or any of its members/ Attorneys/ Advocates/ Lawyers to create an attorney-client relationship through this website.

Decline

Cases

Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd vs Sanjay Dalia

Supreme Court held that the provisions of section 62 of the Copyright Act and section 134 of the Trade Marks Act have to be interpreted in the purposive manner and clarified that if the plaintiff is residing or carrying on business etc. at a place where cause of action, wholly or in part, has also arisen, he has to file a suit at that place. Read More

Paragon Rubber Industries vs. M/s. Pragathi Rubber Mills & Ors

Supreme Court held that the jurisdiction cannot be conferred by joining two causes of action in the same suit when the court has jurisdiction to try the suit only in respect of one cause of action and not the other. Read More

Dabur India Ltd. Vs. K. R. Industries

Supreme Court held that a composite suit would not entitle a court to entertain a suit in respect whereof it has no jurisdiction, territorial or otherwise. Order 2 Rule 3 of the Code specifically states so and, thus, there is no reason as to why the same should be ignored. Read More

Dhodha House vs S.K. Maingi

Supreme Court held that for the purpose of invoking the jurisdiction of a court only because two causes of action joined in terms of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, the same would not mean that thereby the jurisdiction can be conferred upon a court which had jurisdiction to try only the suit in respect of one cause of action and not the other. Recourse to the additional forum, however, in a given case, may be taken if both the causes of action arise within the jurisdiction of the Read More

Lalita Kumari Vs. State of UP & Ors.

5 Bench of Supreme Court held that Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation. Read More

Puneet Kaushik & Anr Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court held that written permit in terms of Section 39 is a mandatory requirement for filing Application outside India and therefore PCT application, even if complete in all other respects cannot be given a filing date earlier than the date on which the written permit in terms of Section 39 is issued. Read More

Nokia Corporation Vs. Deputy Controller of Patents, Chennai

The Chennai High Court held that the time prescribed under Rule 20 for filing national phase PCT Application in India is 31 months from priority date, and the period, which could be extended by taking into consideration of facts and circumstances, is one month under Rule 138. The application for extension is required to be made within the period prescribed. Therefore, proviso would come into operation for the purpose of calculating period of one month. On true interpretation of rule 138, it is h Read More

Natco Pharma Limited Vs. Bayer Corporation

The Controller of Patents Granted India’s first Compulsory License to Natco Pharma Limited in respect of Patent no. 215758 of Bayer Corporation. Read More

Banyan Tree Holding (P) Ltd. Vs. A. Murali Krishna Reddy & Anr.

Delhi High Court set Guidelines to determine jurisdiction in Internet related cases Read More

Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Procter And Gamble Home Products Limited

Kolkata High Court held no interim order if no economic loss shown by disparaging advertisement Read More

S. Ramkumar Vs. Micromax Informatics Pvt. Ltd.

Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed Appeal to set aside injunction in declaratory suit Read More

F.HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD Vs. CIPLA LTD.

Agreeing with Single Judge's Consideration to adverse impact of grant of injunction on life saving drugs Delhi High Court imposed Cost of Rs. 5 Lakhs on Appellant Read More

M/s Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. vs. M/s Super Cassette Industries Ltd

Supreme Court allows appeal of Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. owner of FM Radia “Radio Mirchi” against M/s Super Cassette Industries Ltd owner of “T-Series” and refers matter back to Copyright Board for compulsory license Read More

J. Mitra & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Controller of Patents & Design & Ors.

Supreme Court of India, Appeal against Pre Grant opposition order to be heard by High Court though Patent Act amended and IPAB came into existence Read More

Cadila Healthcare vs. Dabur India/ Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan

Delhi High Court declines Cadila Healthcare's plea to restrain use of 'Sugar Free' Read More

Khoday India Limited Vs. The Scotch Whisky Association and others

Supreme Courts Bars Challenge To “Peter Scot” On Principles Of Acquiescence And/ Or Waiver Read More

Lakhani Rubber Udyog Ltd Vs. Saraswati Utpadan Pvt. Ltd

Supreme Court allowed temporary breather against criminal prosecution for “lakhani” for false lodging complaint under copyright as well as trademark act Read More

Mohan Lal, Prop. of Mourya Industries Vs. Sona Paint & Hardwares; Microlube India Ltd. Vs Rakesh Kumar

Passing off action can be instituted in case of Registered Design, but a composite suit for infringement and passing off of design would not lie Read More

Chemtura Corporation Vs. Union of India

Delhi High Court vacated interim injunction and directs defendants to maintain accounts of manufacture, sale and supply Read More

Man & Machine Vs. Apple

United States Patents and Trademarks Office has awarded “MIGHTY MOUSE” trademark to Man & Machine causing Apple to Abandon it for its products Read More

TVS Motor Company Limited Vs. Bajaj Auto Limited

No balance of convenience or irreparable loss Chennai High Court set aside Injunction granted by Single Judge of High Court Read More

Microsoft Corporation & Anr. vs Mr. Dhiren Gopal & Ors.

In four clubbed cases by Microsoft Corporation against different defendants Delhi High Court allowed ex parte stay and directed Microsoft to pay cost security in case allegations of copyright piracy found speculative Read More

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. v Wyeth Ltd.

Full Bench Delhi High Court held that existence of a design registered abroad in a convention country is not a ground under Section 19(1)(a) for cancellation of a design registered in India. Further registered design if intentionally brought into the public domain without any breach of faith, no longer remains new as per provisions of Indian Design Act. Read More

Glaxo Smith Kline PLC and Ors. Vs. Controller of Patents & Designs and Ors.

Supreme Court of India in a landmark judgement as to interpretation of Indian Patents Act and to the maintainability of challenge to a provision after it is repealed, held that Challenge to a provision accrued before it is repealed is maintainable if the repealing act is silent Read More

The Institute of Cost Accountants of India Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Mumbai High Court (DB) held that mere posting of the letter on website does not constitute communication of objection as required by rule 38(4) under the Trademark Rules. Read More

Union of India Vs. Malhotra Book Depot

Delhi High Court in a Letter Patent Appeal upheld the single Judge Order that issuance of notice on Form O3 mandatory before removing the mark. Restoration period to be counted from date of removal from Register not from due date of renewal Read More

South African Breweries vs Mohan Goldwater Breweries Ltd. & Anr.

Injunction can also be sought in case of threatened use of a Trademark Read More

Glaverbel S.A. vs Dave Rose & Ors.

Amendment of claims in infringement Suit not permissible without amending the plaint even if such amendment has been allowed in some earlier suit Read More

In Re- BERNARD L. BILSKI AND RAND A. WARSAW

In Re: BERNARD L. BILSKI; United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit lays down mahcine transformation test for business method patents Read More

An alleged Invention of A. B. Short

One of the oldest Judgments related to denial of Copyright in Design for prior use passed by Kolkata High Court Read More

Telebrands (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Benent Coleman & Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Delhi High Court held no exclusive rights over descriptive/ common words Read More

Brij Mohan Sharma Vs. M/s. Milton Plastics

Delhi High Court on Appeal held that suit once instituted by a litigant, has to be disposed of strictly as per the procedure prescribed in the Code and not in a cursory or summary fashion Read More

K.S.Gita vs Vision Time India Pvt. Ltd.

Madras High Court held that Plaintiff is not entitled for injunction and instead issued directions to respondents to maintain accounts of the TV mega serial Thangam in Tamil which is being screened till the serial is over and file the statement of accounts in respect of the episodes already screened and also in respect of the serials produced in any other language on the basis of the same script, to maintain and file statement of accounts when they are called upon to produce. Read More

Novartis AG Vs. Union of India & Ors.; Natco Pharma Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors.; M/s. Cancer Patients Aid Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Supreme Court of India rejects Novartis Patent for Beta Crystalline form of Imatinib Mesylate being violative of Section 2(1) (j), (ja) as well as 3(d) of Indian Patent Act in view of the earlier Patent for Imatinib free salt Read More

News & Updates

Quick Contact

Our Services