- Hindustan Pencils (P) Ltd. vs India Stationery Products Co. & Anr., AIR 1990 Delhi 19
- Midas Hygiene Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Sudhir Bhatia & Ors., 2004 (28) PTC 121 SC [Summary]
In case of dishonest adoption, delay does not affect the rights of the proprietor of the trademark.
- Hindustan Pencils Pvt. Ltd vs. India Stationary Products Co. AIR 1990 Delhi 19
- Apple Computer, Inc. vs. Apple Leasing & Industries 1992 (1) Arb. LR 93 at 131 (Para 39)
- Allergan, Inc. vs. Milment Oftho Industries & Ors. AIR 1998 Calcutta 261 (Calcutta DB)
- Chanel Ltd. vs. Sunder Chemicals Agarbati Works (P) Ltd & Anr. 2003 (26) PTC 52 (Delhi)
Taking steps against the use of the mark amounts to an adequate notice-delay in that case is of no consequence.
- Glaxo Operations UK Ltd. Middlesex (England) vs. Samrat Pharmaceutical AIR 1984 Delhi 265 at 270
- Hindustan Pencils Pvt. Ltd. vs. India Stationery Products Co. AIR 1990 Delhi 19
- Alfred Dunhill Limited vs. Kartar Singh Makkar & Ors. 1999 PTC (19) 29
Injunction cannot be refused on account of delay if the Plaintiff has made a strong case on merits.
- Glossy Color & Paints Pvt Ltd & Anr. vs Mona Aggarwal & Ors.