Sharad Vadehra: Advertising Law – Law Expert of the Year in India, 2024 by Global Law Experts
Kan and Krishme is proud to share that Mr. Sharad Vadehra, Managing Partner was recognized as “Advertising Law – Law Expert of the Year in India – 2024” by Global Law Experts
Sharad Vadehra: Trademark Law Expert of the Year in India, 2024 by Global Law Experts
Kan and Krishme is proud to share that Mr. Sharad Vadehra, Managing Partner, was recognized as “Trademark Law Expert of the Year in India – 2024” by Global Law Experts
Kan and Krishme: Law Firm of the Year – Advertising – India in the Corporate America Today – Annual Awards – 2024
Kan and Krishme is proud to share that we were recognized as the “Law Firm of the Year – Advertising – India” in the Corporate America Today – Annual Awards – 2024 edition
Key Observations by the Hon’ble Court: The Court held that the rejection order violated the Principles of Natural Justice as it relied on an objection not previously raised in the hearing notice. “The impugned order suffers from infirmity, as the same has been passed on the basis of objection that did not form part of the objections referred in the hearing notice. It was obligatory for the respondent to have raised all objections in the notice of hearing. Thus, passing the impugned order on the basis of an objection, which was completely missing in the hearing notice, violates the Principles of Natural Justice.”
Kawakami Shigeki Win
Kan and Krishme Achieves Success in Patent Rejection Case at the Delhi High Court
Kan and Krishme is delighted to announce a significant victory in the matter of Kawakami, Shigeki & Ors. v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs (C.A. (COMM.IPD-PAT) 191/2022), where the Hon’ble Delhi High Court set aside a patent rejection order issued by the Indian Patent Office. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to the principles of natural justice in patent examination and decision-making processes.
Case Background: The subject patent application faced objections under Section 2(1)(ja) for lack of inventiveness and under Section 3(d) for non-patentability, both of which were successfully contested by Kan and Krishme, representing the Applicants. However, the Indian Patent Office rejected the application on the ground of lack of novelty under Section 2(1)(j) of the Indian Patent Act. This objection was not raised in the hearing notice issued by the Respondent.
Outcome: The Hon’ble Court set aside the rejection order and remanded the matter to the Indian Patent Office for fresh consideration. This ensures that the Applicant’s right to a fair hearing is upheld and establishes a precedent for adherence to due process during patent examinations.
Impact: This judgment emphasizes the criticality of transparency and procedural fairness in the handling of patent applications. It reinforces the Applicant’s right to address all objections during the hearing process and prevents arbitrary decisions based on unnotified grounds.
Reena MP Singh, Partner at Kan and Krishme – Rising IP Star, 2024 (ManagingIP)
Kan & Krishme is delighted to announce that our esteemed Partner, Reena M.P. Singh, has been recognized as a Rising Star 2024 by IP STARS, Managing IP’s renowned rankings publication.
According to Managing IP, “This special publication, which is produced by the IP STARS research team, recognizes some of the best up-and-coming intellectual property practitioners in private practice who have contributed to the success of their firms and clients. Although selection is primarily based on an individual’s contributions and expertise, IP STARS also takes into account their activities in the IP community.”
Reena’s recognition underscores her invaluable contributions to Kan & Krishme’s continued success and her unwavering commitment to delivering exceptional results for clients across diverse IP matters.
Kan & Krishme extends heartfelt congratulations to Reena M.P. Singh on this well-deserved achievement. We are proud to have her as part of our team and look forward to her continued success and contributions to the field of intellectual property.
For more information about our Firm, please contact us at knk@kankrishme.com or visit our website at www.kankrishme.com
Sunpharma Win
Kan and Krishme Secures Affirmation of Trademark Rights for Taiyo Kagaku Co., Ltd.
Kan and Krishme is proud to announce its successful representation of Taiyo Kagaku Co., Ltd. in the matter of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. vs. Taiyo Kagaku Co. Ltd. (C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 25/2022), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court upheld the registration of Taiyo Kagaku’s trademark “SUNFIBER” under Class 5.
This case arises from an appeal, challenging the order dated December 28, 2019, passed by the Registrar of Trademarks, which rejected the Appellant’s opposition to the Respondent’s trademark application for “SUNFIBER” in class 5. The Appellant, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., claimed that “SUNFIBER” was deceptively similar to its prior-registered trademark “SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.” (device mark) and other SUN formative trade marks such as “SUNHALER,” and “SUNBURN,” all of which are used for goods in class 5, specifically pharmaceutical and medicinal preparations.
The main contention of the Appellant was that it has acquired exclusive rights over the word “SUN” and that “SUN” is recognized as a well-known mark. The people in trade and public at large associate the word SUN with the Appellant only and to the extent that any product sold under the SUN formative mark will lead to confusion regarding origin of the products.
In representing Taiyo Kagaku Co. Ltd. in this matter, Kan and Krishme defended the trademark application by emphasizing that the word SUN per se cannot be monopolized by anyone as well as relied on an earlier agreement between the parties concerning the trademark “SUNPHENON” which also consists the word SUN. Under this agreement, both parties had consented to the mutual use of the word “SUN” in their trademarks with clear distinctions in the product categories they covered. We also relied on the order passed by the Registrar of Trademarks, in which the Registrar stated that “SUN,” being a common English word, cannot be monopolized, and that many marks containing the word “SUN” are registered under Class 05.
Consequently, in view of this prior agreement between both the parties and the restricted scope of goods in class 5 to dietary fibres, the Respondent decided not to pursue the appeal anymore. Therefore, the court subsequently disposed of the appeal as “not pressed” and affirmed that the trademark registration for “SUNFIBER” was correct.
Physiolac Win
Kan and Krishme Triumphs in Trademark Cancellation Case before the Madras High Court
Kan and Krishme is proud to announce its recent success in representing Financiere Batteur Sas before the Hon’ble Madras High Court in a pivotal trademark cancellation case concerning the mark “PHYSIOLAC AR.” This decision underscores the importance of genuine trademark use and reaffirms the legislative intent of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The petitioner, a globally recognized company specializing in baby and childcare products under the brand “PHYSIOLAC,” sought the cancellation and rectification of the trademark “PHYSIOLAC AR” under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act. The respondent had secured the trademark registration in 2016 on a “proposed to be used” basis but failed to demonstrate any bona fide use of the mark for over five years and three months.
After a thorough examination of evidence and submissions, the Hon’ble Justice Abdul Quddhose delivered a landmark decision:
The Court found the respondent’s justification for non-use untenable, as there were no legal or regulatory barriers to its use.
It was observed that the respondent’s actions constituted bad faith, with no genuine intention to use the trademark, and were instead aimed at exploiting the goodwill of the “PHYSIOLAC” brand.
Recognizing the substantial goodwill and transborder reputation of the petitioner’s “PHYSIOLAC” brand, the Court directed the cancellation of the respondent’s mark and the rectification of the trademark register.
This decision emphasizes the fundamental principle that trademarks must not be hoarded without genuine business use and acts as a strong deterrent against bad-faith registrations.
The Court’s findings reaffirm Kan and Krishme’s commitment to protecting the intellectual property rights of its clients. Our team demonstrated exceptional legal acumen in proving that the respondent’s registration contravened Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The petitioner’s trademark “PHYSIOLAC” enjoys significant goodwill across the globe and has earned recognition under Article 6(bis) of the Paris Convention.
Case Citation – Financiere Batteur Sas v. Kalai Arasu & Ors., (T) OP (TM) No.481 of 2023
Physiolac Win
Kan and Krishme Triumphs in Trademark Cancellation Case before the Madras High Court
Kan and Krishme is proud to announce its recent success in representing Financiere Batteur Sas before the Hon’ble Madras High Court in a pivotal trademark cancellation case concerning the mark “PHYSIOLAC AR.” This decision underscores the importance of genuine trademark use and reaffirms the legislative intent of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The petitioner, a globally recognized company specializing in baby and childcare products under the brand “PHYSIOLAC,” sought the cancellation and rectification of the trademark “PHYSIOLAC AR” under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act. The respondent had secured the trademark registration in 2016 on a “proposed to be used” basis but failed to demonstrate any bona fide use of the mark for over five years and three months.
After a thorough examination of evidence and submissions, the Hon’ble Justice Abdul Quddhose delivered a landmark decision:
The Court found the respondent’s justification for non-use untenable, as there were no legal or regulatory barriers to its use.
It was observed that the respondent’s actions constituted bad faith, with no genuine intention to use the trademark, and were instead aimed at exploiting the goodwill of the “PHYSIOLAC” brand.
Recognizing the substantial goodwill and transborder reputation of the petitioner’s “PHYSIOLAC” brand, the Court directed the cancellation of the respondent’s mark and the rectification of the trademark register.
This decision emphasizes the fundamental principle that trademarks must not be hoarded without genuine business use and acts as a strong deterrent against bad-faith registrations.
The Court’s findings reaffirm Kan and Krishme’s commitment to protecting the intellectual property rights of its clients. Our team demonstrated exceptional legal acumen in proving that the respondent’s registration contravened Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The petitioner’s trademark “PHYSIOLAC” enjoys significant goodwill across the globe and has earned recognition under Article 6(bis) of the Paris Convention.
Case Citation – Financiere Batteur Sas v. Kalai Arasu & Ors., (T) OP (TM) No.481 of 2023
Managing IP’s IP STAR
Kan and Krishme’s Sharad Vadehra Named Patent and Trademark Star 2025 by Managing IP
Kan and Krishme, a leading intellectual property law firm headquartered in New Delhi, proudly announces that its Managing Partner, Sharad Vadehra, has once again been recognized as an IP STARS: Patent Star 2025 and Trademark Star 2025 by Managing IP, one of the most prestigious global rankings in the intellectual property industry.
The IP STARS list, published annually by Managing IP, honors the most respected IP practitioners worldwide based on peer feedback, client recommendations, and in-depth independent research. The dual recognition for both patents and trademarks underscores Mr. Vadehra’s longstanding commitment to legal excellence, innovation, and client service in all spheres of intellectual property law.
With over three decades of experience, Sharad is known for his pioneering work in patent prosecution, litigation, and portfolio strategy, particularly in the chemical, pharmaceutical, and life sciences sectors. He is equally regarded for his expertise in trademark protection and enforcement across India and the South Asian region, including Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives, Myanmar, and Pakistan.
This recognition reinforces Kan and Krishme’s reputation as a powerhouse in the Indian and South Asian IP landscape. Established in 1989, the firm continues to represent Fortune 500 companies, leading research institutions, and fast-growing startups across a range of technical fields.
For more information, please contact us at knk@kankrishme.com. Please visit www.kankrishme.com for more information about our services.
Managing IP Ranked Firm
Kan & Krishme Recognized Once Again in Managing IP’s 2025 IP Stars Rankings for Patent and Trademark Prosecution
Kan & Krishme is proud to announce that it has once again been recognized in the 2025 edition of Managing IP’s IP Stars, earning a national ranking in both Patent Prosecution and Trademark Prosecution categories.
This marks over a decade of consistent recognition, with the firm first appearing in the prestigious IP Stars rankings in 2012. The annual IP Stars guide, published by Managing Intellectual Property, is one of the most respected international resources for identifying leading IP firms and practitioners worldwide. Rankings are based on a thorough and independent assessment of client feedback, firm submissions, and market analysis.
The firm’s inclusion in the 2025 rankings reaffirms its ongoing commitment to excellence in securing and protecting intellectual property rights for clients across a wide range of industries. Known for its technical depth, strategic foresight, and client-first approach, Kan & Krishme continues to be a trusted partner for domestic and international companies navigating the complexities of Indian IP law.
“We’re honored by this continued recognition from Managing IP,” said Sharad Vadehra, Managing Partner. “It reflects the trust our clients place in us year after year, and the tireless efforts of our team to deliver high-quality, cost-effective IP solutions.”
For more information about Kan & Krishme’s IP services or to get in touch with our team, please visit www.kankrishme.com or contact us at knk@kankrishme.com.
Kan and Krishme victory in post grant opposition
Kan and Krishme Successfully Defends Patent in Landmark Post-Grant Opposition Ruling
Kan and Krishme is pleased to announce a significant victory on behalf of its client in a closely contested post-grant opposition proceeding before the Indian Patent Office (IPO). The patent in question—IN 315447, which claims a novel lyophilized gel-phase liposomal composition—was upheld in full following post grant opposition proceedings initiated by Cipla Ltd. and Mylan Laboratories Ltd., two of India’s leading pharmaceutical companies.
The case involved a comprehensive challenge under Section 25(2) of the Patents Act, 1970, including:
Lack of novelty and prior public use [Sections 25(2)(b) and 25(2)(d)]
Lack of inventive step [Section 25(2)(e)]
Lack of patentability under Sections 3(d) and 3(e) [Section 25(2)(f)]
Insufficiency of disclosure [Section 25(2)(g)]
Non-compliance with Section 8 [Section 25(2)(h)]
Adding to the complexity, the Opposition Board had recommended revocation of the patent on multiple grounds, including lack of inventive step and non-patentability.
However, after a detailed hearing and written submissions, the Controller of Patents issued a 172-page order—one of the most detailed opposition rulings issued by the IPO to date—rejecting every ground of opposition and maintaining the patent as granted.
The patentee was represented by Mr. Sharad Vadehra, Ms. Shikha Baiswar, and Ms. Reena M.P. Singh from Kan and Krishme, who led a comprehensive legal and technical defense, successfully establishing that:
The claimed composition was not disclosed or rendered obvious by any cited prior art. Crucial features such as lyophilization of gel-phase liposomes with a transition temperature ≥37°C, in the substantial absence of internal cryoprotectants, while maintaining drug retention and liposome size upon reconstitution, were not anticipated.
Section 3(d) objections were unsupported, as the Opponents failed to identify any “known substance” or demonstrate that the claimed invention was merely a new form. Experimental data demonstrated enhanced functional efficacy, including long-term drug stability and retention.
Section 3(e) objections were countered by demonstrating the claimed invention was not a mere admixture, but a synergistic composition with specific component concentrations delivering unexpected technical advantages, such as liposomal integrity and stability post-lyophilization.
On the issue of sufficiency of disclosure, the patentee provided ample technical detail through specification examples and post-filing data that fully enabled the invention.
“This decision is a milestone not only for our client, but for the evolving Indian patent landscape,” said Sharad Vadehra, Managing Partner at Kan and Krishme. “It clearly demonstrates the Indian Patent Office’s growing emphasis on technical merit, evidentiary depth, and impartial adjudication, even in the most complex pharmaceutical matters.”
Importantly, this decision defies the long-held perception—especially among foreign applicants—that Indian post-grant oppositions may disproportionately favour domestic challengers, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector. By issuing a well-reasoned, evidence-backed decision in favour of a foreign patentee, the IPO has reaffirmed its commitment to merit-based outcomes and legal consistency.
Kan and Krishme congratulates its team and thanks the Indian Patent Office for its diligence, clarity, and commitment to excellence.