Skip to content
rawlaw unfiltered legal news
  • News
  • Services for Advocates
  • Bookmarks
  • facebook.com
  • twitter.com
  • t.me
  • instagram.com
  • youtube.com

trademark dispute

Home - trademark dispute

Delhi High Court: “A businessman cannot monopolise a generic floral word” — Court denies injunction in the TULIP trademark dispute over perfumes and cotton products
Posted inNews

Delhi High Court: “A businessman cannot monopolise a generic floral word” — Court denies injunction in the TULIP trademark dispute over perfumes and cotton products

Court’s decision The Delhi High Court refused to grant an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the mark “AGN TULIP” for perfumes, holding that the plaintiff’s trademark “TULIPS”, though…
Posted by Rawlaw November 14, 2025
Delhi High Court: “Well-Known Marks Deserve the Highest Protection” – Permanent Injunction Granted in PRINCTON vs PRINCETON Trademark Dispute
Posted inNews

Delhi High Court: “Well-Known Marks Deserve the Highest Protection” – Permanent Injunction Granted in PRINCTON vs PRINCETON Trademark Dispute

Court’s Decision The Delhi High Court decreed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off in favour of the plaintiff, a globally renowned academic institution, against the defendants using deceptively…
Posted by Rawlaw October 1, 2025

Recent News

  • Delhi High Court: Prosecutor recruitment requires strict compliance with experience criteria — “No relaxation beyond advertisement terms; writ petition dismissed”
  • Supreme Court of India: Absconding accused cannot claim anticipatory bail on co-accused’s acquittal — “Granting pre-arrest relief after six years on the run is perverse; High Court order set aside”
  • Bombay High Court: Withdrawal of additional increments for LSGD/LGS diplomas without notice of change prima facie illegal — “Long-standing concession attracts Section 9-A; interim stay upheld”
  • Supreme Court of India: Income Tax Department cannot deny regularization to similarly placed casual workers — “Misapplication of Umadevi corrected; services ordered regularized from 01 July 2006”
  • Delhi High Court: Arbitral award granting 484-day extension in railway tunnel project upheld — “Critical path analysis plausible; no patent illegality in setting aside liquidated damages”
Copyright 2026 — Raw Law. All rights reserved.
Scroll to Top