Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Court: delhi Page 1 of about 22,517 results (0.068 seconds)

Dec 03 2007 (HC)

R.K. Saraf Vs. the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2008(36)PTC520(Del)

..... circumstances of the assignment alleged by the petitioner, in its favor, of the trade mark in 2004 and two whether notice under section 25 was issued and if so to whom at the relevant time. these can be better considered ..... been impugned, are appealable to the appellate board., in terms of section 91. the appellate board has been established under section 83 of the trade marks act, 1999.12. i am of the opinion that at least two important aspects involve examination into facts i.e. the nature and surrounding ..... had been issued.10. now the decisions relied upon by the petitioner, particularly in polson's case is undoubtedly suggestive of an understanding that trade-marks can be renewed despite lapse of the period. this understanding was based upon an appreciation of the law expounded in kerly's treatise on trademarks ..... the renewal is sought after expiry of the period. it was urged that the court held that there is no restriction placed in the renewal of trade mark retrospectively and that the provisions of the statute were not mandatory. similarly, the judgment of madras high court reported as abdul karim sahib & sons. ..... to issue and serve notice in the prescribed manner to the registered proprietor about the date of expiration. to enable renewal of registration of the trade mark without due compliance with such requirement, the use of power under section 25(4) and submitted that even after removal the registrar had the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2006 (HC)

Paul Manufacturing Co. Vs. the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks and ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2006(32)PTC285(Del)

..... issuance of appropriate writ, direction and order in the nature of certiorari and/or any other writ/order quashing the registration certificate of the trade mark registration no. 1280913 granted under the trade marks act, 1999 by the registrar of trade marks. it has been asseverated that the petitioner has filed a rectification application before the intellectual property appellate board (ipab) which, however, is not ..... pursue appeal/rectification application which it has already filed. secondly, the petitioner can avail the remedy of a review as contemplated by sections 57(2) and 127(c) of the trade marks act. he also contends that while the contesting respondents have no objection to the withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to pursue the relief before the ipab, if any ..... been noted in these proceedings that on 20.10.2005 joint secretary, government of india, had appeared in this court and had stated that the appointment of the technical member (trade marks) of the appellate board would be carried out within one month. this was not done and time was extended up to 20.1.2006. the appointment of the technical member ..... court besides generating a multiplicity of proceedings.6. prima facie on the strength of the above observations no proceedings are maintainable before the registrar, trade marks, either under section 57(2) or section 127(c) of the trade marks act, 1999. in any event it is not open to the respondents to dictate to the petitioner which remedy it should avail of. if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 2009 (HC)

Anjani Kumar Goenka and anr. Vs. Goenka Institute of Education and Res ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR2008Delhi1992; 2008(2)ALD(Cri)547

..... kaul, learned senior counsel is that prima facie suit is not maintainable. he referred to the provisions of section 35 of the trade mark act, 1999. section 35 of the trade mark act, 1999 reads as under:35. saving for use of name, address or description of goods or services.- nothing in this ..... . furthermore, if the plaintiff has not taken any action against several other infringements, this does not mean that the plaintiff has abandoned its trade mark and cannot challenge the action of the defendant.63. the plaintiffs place reliance on the following cases to support his contention that the third party ..... , or personal name is to be considered on the same footing as a surname or a personal name. (see p. narayanan's law of trade marks and passing off (6th edition), para 8. 20).20. there is no dispute that surname cannot become distinctive without the evidence of distinctiveness. no ..... registered proprietor of the trademark g.d. goenka, goenkas, goenka and g in various other classes, details of which are given below:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------s. no. trade marks class status app.no. j/no. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 gdgoenka 41 regd. 1281086 1325 s-1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2 g 41 regd. 1238908 1325 s-1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3 goenkas .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2009 (HC)

Cinni Foundation Vs. Raj Kumar Sah and Sons and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2009(41)PTC320(Del)

..... raised by mr. bansal, the learned counsel for the plaintiff contended that by virtue of the deed of assignment dated 05.11.2000 the plaintiff had become owner of the trade mark/trade name 'cinni' from the date of the execution thereof, i.e., 05.11.2000 and the complete rights vesting in m/s. raj kumar sah and sons from the date ..... correspondence with the trademark registry in this court to show that their application for registration is still pending. prima facie it cannot be inferred that the application for registration of trade mark on the basis of assignment of the plaintiffs is not pending. registration/recordal of the name of the proprietor does not confer title but is merely an evidence of title ..... with the registrar. section 45 which is apposite reads as under:45. registration of assignments and transmissions. -(1) where a person becomes entitled by assignment or transmission to a registered trade mark, he shall apply in the prescribed manner to the registrar to register his title, and the registrar shall, on receipt of the application and on proof of title to his ..... . c.k. sah as managing trustee and countersigned by mr. ravindra kumar sah as trustee to urge that the defendant no. 2 (ravindra kumar sah) had explicitly acknowledged that the trade mark 'cinni' vested in the 'cinni foundation'. the said letter being apposite is reproduced hereunder:september 13, 2005m/s pawan electrical industriesplot no. 338, khajuripandeypurvaranasi - 221 002kind attn: sri abhishek agrawaldear .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2001 (HC)

Three-n-products Pvt. Ltd., 3030, Street No. 4, Ranjit Nagar, New Delh ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT271

..... as it denotes something relating to traditional indian science of health or medicine known as ayurved and such a generic and descriptive word cannot be registered as a trade mark under section 9 of the trade mark act. besides it is contended that the goods of the defendants viz. footwear are vastly different from those of the plaintiff and there is no likelihood of ..... own activities. in the case of surjit singh v. m/s alembic glass industries ltd., : air1987delhi319 , another learned single judge of this court observed that if the adoption of similar trade mark by the defendant is found to be dishonest, it will certainly disentitle the defendants from any protection from the court. similar observation were made by the division bench of the ..... relaxo rubber limited and another v. aman cable industries and another 1998 pct (18) . in that case the plaintiff was the registered owner of the trade mark relaxo for footwear. defendant started using the same trade mark for manufacturing and selling pvc pipe. learned single judge in that case came to the conclusion that relaxo is not an invented, fancy, new word. rather ..... hindi is of generic or descriptive nature and thereforee incapable of exclusive appropriation by a party. rather interim injunction in that case was declined because on a visual comparison of trade mark and logos learned single judge came to the conclusion that there is no over all similarity between the two and products. the defendant's product was tablet whereas the plaintiff .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2005 (HC)

Bikanervala Vs. New Bikanerwala

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2005(30)PTC113(Del)

..... not identical or similar to that of the case which received consideration of the division bench.28. the legal preposition which flows from the above decisions is that:a) a trade mark/trade name, even if it contains or refers to a geographical name, but if it conveys a distinct and specific meaning in common parlance as to indicate the origin of the ..... justice and such injury to the plaintiff would not be capable of being undone at a latter stage. it is also equally well settled that the use of a similar trade mark/trade name by third parties is not of much relevance in deciding the issue between the plaintiff and the defendant.19. mr. amarjit singh, learned counsel for the defendant has ..... distinctive and eye-catching artistic label titled 'bikanervala' which artistic label in its essential features consists of alternate parallel strips of red and yellow in a rectangle, below which the trade mark/trade name / artistic work 'bikanervala' of the plaintiff firm is written in a white script on a red background and further below which appears the device of 'jhalar' having a ..... font adopted by the defendant would show that the defendant has used the trade mark/trade name of the plaintiff as a model / guide while conceiving its trade name/trade mark 'new bikanervala' and, thereforee, is guilty of dilution of the trade mark of the plaintiff. it is claimed that the use of the trade mark by trade name/label 'bikanervala' with prefix 'new' is visually, structurally and phonetically identical .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 2009 (HC)

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federat ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2009(41)PTC336(Del)

..... honest practices in industrial or commercial matters, and (b) is not such as to take unfair advantage of or be detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark. (2) a registered trade mark is not infringed where- (a) the use in relation to goods or services indicates the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, the time of production of ..... the date of application for registration it has acquired a distinctive character as a result of the use made of it or is a well-known trade mark. (2) a mark shall not be registered as a trade mark if- (a) it is of such nature as to deceive the public or cause confusion; (b) it contains or comprises of any matter likely to hurt ..... the product, but when product can be described in innumerable other ways such as 'free of sugar', 'sugar less', 'no sugar', contains artificial sweetener' etc., the use of the distinctive trade mark of the appellant is dishonest. (8) the respondent had negotiated to purchase appellant's 'sugar free' for the purpose of manufacturing and marketing diabetic ice-cream. in view of this ..... from using in any manner, particularly in relation to their products, viz. frozen desserts and choc minis, the expression 'sugar free', which, the appellant claimed had acquired exclusivity as a trade mark in relation to the various products manufactured by it. 4. the learned single judge by his impugned judgment dated 23rd october, 2007 inter alia recorded the above findings:(a) since .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 2010 (HC)

Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : LC2010(2)167

..... of trade marks in the manner noticed hereinbefore.9. this court has heard the submissions of mr. amit sibal, the learned counsel appearing for super cassettes and mr. n. mahabir, the learned counsel ..... t and not the device of circle.8. the appeal in this court filed by telco being cm(m) no. 344 of 1995 stood transferred after the enactment of the trade marks act, 1999 (tm act 1999) to the ipab. by the impugned order dated 1st october 2004, the ipab partly allowed the appeal and modified the order passed by the dr ..... 9 in respect of electrical and electronic apparatus and instruments, radio and television transmitting and receiving sets, electric and electronic devices, audio and video recording etc. the mark was accepted for registration and advertised in trade marks journal no. 1005 dated 20th june 1991.5. respondent no. 3 telco (later renamed as tata motors ltd.) filed a notice of opposition no. del-7265 ..... ) and (1) (b) of section 11(1) required to be satisfied conjunctively. in other words, both identity or similarity with an earlier trade mark and similarity of goods and services in respect of which were covered by the earlier trade mark had to be shown. although section 11(2) was not adverted to, it appears that the ipab applied the test set out therein .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2011 (HC)

M/S K.E.Burgmann a/S Vs. H.N.Shah and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... by, when another is invading the rights and spending money on it. it is a course of conduct inconsistent with the claim for exclusive rights in a trade mark, trade name etc. it implies positive acts; not merely silence or inaction such as is involved in laches. in harcourt v. white10 sr. john romilly said: ..... right in the defendant as was laid down in rodgers v. nowill12. "delay simpliciter may be no defence to a suit for infringement of a trade mark, but the decisions to which i have referred to clearly indicate that where a trader allows a rival trader to expend money over a considerable ..... section 15 to 20 and not with reference to sub-section (2) of section 134 of trade marks act. this judgment does not help the defendant for the simple reason that if section 20 of the code of civil procedure is applied, this ..... disputed. in the case of saranya zaveri (supra), it was held that in a suit falling under clause 3(c) of section 134 (1) of trade marks act, 1999, the territorial jurisdiction of the court has to be decided with reference to general provisions of the code of civil procedure, namely, under ..... mere negligence and acquiescence." therefore, acquiescence is one facet of delay. if the plaintiff stood by knowingly and let the defendants build up an important trade until it had become necessary to crush it, then the plaintiffs would be stopped by their acquiescence. if the acquiescence in the infringement amounts to consent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 2007 (HC)

Sunrider Corporation Vs. Hindustan Lever Limited and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : LC2007(3)46; 2007(35)PTC388(Del)

..... for filing of the evidence affidavit in support of an opposition beyond the maximum period of three months prescribed under rule 50 (1) of the trade marks rules, 2002 and that the answer to question no. 2 is that the non-filing of the evidence affidavit within the prescribed time would by itself ..... give any discretion to the registrar in this connection. the object is apparent that the delays be cut down in deciding the application for registration of a trade mark.16. it is, thereforee, quite clear that the answer to question no. 1 is that the registrar does not have the power to extend the time ..... mentioned therein.7. reading rule 50, it is clear that the evidence by way of affidavit in support of an opposition to the registration of a trade mark has to be filed within two months of the service of a copy of the counter-statement on the opponent. this period of two months is further ..... counter-statement in form tm-6 on 14.10.2002. it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that under rule 50 (1) of the trade marks rules, 2002, evidence by way of affidavit in support of the respondent no. 1's opposition ought to have been filed within two months which was extendable ..... registrar to extend time. he also placed strong reliance on a decision of a full bench of this court in the case of hastimal jain trading as oswal industries v. registrar of trade marks and anr. 2000 ptc 24 (fb).6. section 21 of the 1999 act contains provisions in respect of the opposition to registration. sub .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //