- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Indian automobile majors Bajaj Auto and TVS Motor Company have decided to amicably settle a patent dispute that had been simmering for over a decade over twin-spark plug technology.The dispute first started in 2007 when Bajaj Auto accused TVS of infringing on its patent on DTS-i (digital twin spark ignition), when TVS launched its motorcycle Flame 125 that according to the company,...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Indian automobile majors Bajaj Auto and TVS Motor Company have decided to amicably settle a patent dispute that had been simmering for over a decade over twin-spark plug technology.
The dispute first started in 2007 when Bajaj Auto accused TVS of infringing on its patent on DTS-i (digital twin spark ignition), when TVS launched its motorcycle Flame 125 that according to the company, controlled combustion variable timing intelligent (CC-VTi) technology. TVS argued that the Flame was fitted with a three-valve engine based on what it called CCVT-i (Controlled Combustion Variable Timing Intelligent) technology, which was different from the technology used by Bajaj Auto. According to Bajaj's allegations, TVS' CCVT-i technology was a copy of the DTS-i system, first introduced in Bajaj Auto's popular Pulsar range of motorcycles. TVS had then filed a Rs. 250 crore defamation suit against Bajaj Auto.
The companies have however come to a settlement and have withdrawn all related pending cases which were pending before the Madras High Court, Bombay High Court, the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai and courts in Sri Lanka and Mexico, including a defamation suit filed by TVS Motor Company against Bajaj.
Neither firm is required to pay any compensation or penalty to the other as part of the said settlement.