Enforcement & Litigation
Perspectives on enforcement & litigation across India and the subcontinent.
29 March 2022
Groundless Threats and Trademark Bullying: What Section 142 Does
A bigger brand fires off cease-and-desist letters with no real case. Section 142 lets the party threatened hit back — an injunction, damages, or a declaration that the threats were unjustified. How it works, and its limits.
Sandhya S · 23 August 2021
Infringement and Passing Off: How to Frame the Injunction Prayer
Pleading separate injunction prayers — one for infringement, one for passing off — is, the Bombay High Court says, 'a singularly unwise practice.' Why the relief should be framed as a single injunction.
18 July 2021
Delhi High Court Creates India's First Intellectual Property Division
When the Tribunals Reforms Ordinance abolished the IPAB in 2021, its work moved to the High Courts. Delhi responded by creating a dedicated Intellectual Property Division — the first in India, and the model the others have since followed.
Shana Varughese · 5 April 2021
Renewing a Customs Recordal in India: The Missing Provision
A customs recordal lasts five years — but the 2007 Rules give no way to renew it, forcing rights holders to refile from scratch. Why that gap exists, the practical pain it causes, and the simpler fix that's needed.
26 March 2021
BigBasket v. Daily Basket: Trademark Protection or Bullying?
BigBasket's cease-and-desist to tiny startup Daily Basket over the common word 'basket' drew accusations of trademark bullying — and a viral pushback site, bbisabully.com. Where legitimate enforcement ends and bullying begins, and the Section 142 groundless-threats risk.
8 March 2021
Lifting the COVID Extension of Limitation: How the Deadlines Finally Reset
The Supreme Court's suo motu extension of limitation ran from March 2020, was lifted in March 2021, revived during the second wave, and was finally closed by the order of 10 January 2022 — excluding 15 March 2020 to 28 February 2022, with 90 days from 1 March 2022. Here is the full arc and what it meant for IP filings.
4 December 2020
Plex v. Zee: Global Reputation Is Not Enough, and Neither Is Urgency You Created
Plex amended its application from 'proposed to be used' to claiming use since 2008, then moved for an injunction against ZEEPLEX the day before launch. The Bombay High Court refused — on reputation, on the comparison to Hotstar and Disney, and on the delay.
19 November 2020
When a Cease-and-Desist Backfires: Legal Notices as 'Groundless Threats'
A cease-and-desist is the usual first move against an infringer — but if your claim is weak, the recipient can turn the tables and injunct *you* for making groundless threats. The BurjNoida v. Burj Al Arab warning.
Raja Pannir Selvam · 29 September 2020
Playing Music in Your Business? You Need a Public Performance Licence
Hotels, restaurants, gyms and malls that play music need copyright licences. Who to license from, why PPL and Novex matter, and the Leopold Café ruling on agents issuing licences under Section 30.
11 October 2019
No Patent, No Infringement: Novartis v. Natco on Ceritinib
Natco launched its product while a post-grant opposition was pending, then the Opposition Board reversed itself and the patent was revoked. The Delhi High Court held that an injunction cannot survive the patent — rights in a patent subsist only during its lifetime.
3 September 2019
The 'Essential Feature' Doctrine: When One Word Decides Infringement
'MAXCURE' infringed 'MAX' because 'MAX' was the essential, source-identifying feature of the plaintiff's marks. How Indian courts isolate the dominant element to decide trademark infringement.
7 August 2019
PULSE Pulses PULSER: A Copycat Candy — and Damages for an Animal Cause
A street hawker sold 'PULSER' Kaccha Aam candies copying PULSE's trade dress and tagline. The Delhi High Court injuncted it — and, in a notable twist, directed the defendant to donate ₹2 lakh to an animal welfare centre instead of paying the plaintiff.