The Delhi High Court in a case [1] temporary restrained Hardik Mukeshbhai Pansheriya & Ors. from listing their products using Zed Lifestyle Pvt Ltd.’s mark “BEARDO” under the category of “BEARDO STORE” on the online marketplace Zed Lifestyle argued that they have, by an agreement with, an exclusive right to display its product on the webpage under the name “BEARDO STORE.” Besides that, it was also argued that Hardik Mukeshbhai’s products have no resemblance to the products of the mark “BEARDO” which amounts to false representation along with the capitalisation of the goodwill of Zed Lifestyle’s registered mark.

The Delhi High Court in a case [1]  temporary restrained one Deva Nand Sukhia from  using the mark “GOODYEAR” held by the Goodyear Tyre and Rubber (GTR) Company and Anr. The GTR Company argued that the mark “GOODYEAR” was adopted in India in 1920 and thus is a well-known mark.


Natco Pharma Limited (NPL) filed an application dated 3rd May, 2021 before the Controller of Patents under the Patents Act, 1970 for a compulsory licence in the light of deteriorating conditions in India caused by COVID19, for a drug named Baricitinib, which is solely imported in India by Eli Lilly & Co. NPL stated in their application that they will provide Baricitinib at a much lower price and in larger quantities to the needy public.

The Delhi High Court, in the first of its kind case, restrained [1] Xiaomi Corporation & Ors from enforcing an anti-suit injunction which Xiaomi obtained against InterDigital Technology Corporation in a Wuhan Court. Along with that, the court also ordered Xiaomi to fully compensate InterDigital in case the Wuhan Court imposes any penalty on InterDigital with respect to the anti-suit injunction. 


Join our newsletter and get 20% discount
Promotion nulla vitae elit libero a pharetra augue