Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Court: mumbai aurangabad Page 1 of about 621 results (0.045 seconds)

Aug 10 2012 (HC)

Gurdeepsingh S/O Surjitsingh Chabda Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Thro ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... on the following judgments:- (i) state of u.p. and others vs. m/s indian hume pipe co. ltd., : air 1977 supreme court 1132. (ii) whirlpool corporation vs. registrar of trade marks, mumbai and others : air 1999 supreme court 22. (iii) the honble secretary and correspondent, badruka college of commerce and arts (day), hyderabad vs. state of andhra pradesh and others : air .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 2013 (HC)

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... show that its case falls within any of the exceptions carved out in baburam prakash chandra maheshwari v. antarim zila parishad air 1969 sc 556, whirlpool corporation v. registrar of trade marks, mumbai (1998) 8 scc 1 and harbanslal sahnia and another v. indian oil corporation ltd., and others (2003) 2 scc 107 and some other judgments, then the high court may ..... was thus allowed and the appellant was held entitled to refund of the whole amount of e.m.d. 52. the division bench of the bombay high court in bholenath trading co.'s case (supra) observed that the bidder, who had withdrawn the bid and sought return of the e.m.d. prior to the acceptance of its bid by the ..... ). c) air 2008, gauhati 38 (m/s.rose valley real estate and construction limited vs. united commercial bank and another) ?? single judge. d) 2006(5) bom.c.r. 207 (bholenath trading co. vs. state bank of india) ?? division bench. e) 2011(1) bankers journal 315 (chemstar chemicals and intermediates (p.) ltd., vs. commercial tax officer, purasawalkam assessment circle and others) ?? single .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 2016 (HC)

Swami Samarth Agencies, Through its Proprietor Ratnakar and Others Vs. ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... plaintiff has spent huge amount on the publicity of the aforesaid brand name. it is the case of the plaintiff that defendants have no right to use the aforesaid trade mark or similar trade mark in view of the reputation and good will earned by the plaintiff. 6. it is the case of the plaintiff that in the month of october 2014 the plaintiff ..... label of the plaintiff 's brand "jeewandrop". it is contended that as per information of the plaintiff, defendant no.3 has applied for registration of trade mark "jaldrop" in class 5 and this trade mark is deceptively similar to the trade mark "jeevandrop" of the plaintiff. it is contended that the defendant nos.2 and 3 are marketing the product "jaldrop" of defendant no.1 and ..... is prevented from trying to wrongfully utilise the reputation and goodwill of another by trying to deceive the public through passing off his goods. 90. in kerly s law of trade marks and trade names supplement pages 42 and 43, paragraph 16-02, the concept of passing off is stated as under:- "the law of passing-off can be summarised in one short ..... made:- "the defendants are hereby restrained, by themselves or through their servants, agents or through anybody else on their behalf, from using the trade mark "jal drop" or any other trade mark identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered trade mark "jeevan drop" till final decision of the suit." initially ex-parte order of temporary injunction was made and it is confirmed on merits .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (HC)

Viraj Alcoholes and Allied Industries Ltd. Vs. Brihan Karan Sugar Synd ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... filed the suit for permanent injunction, damages, accounts and other reliefs, for infringement of copy right under the copyright act, 1957 and for passing off under the trade marks act, 1999 (copyright act? and trade marks act? in brief). the district judge has granted temporary injunction in favour of plaintiff, restraining the defendant from using, printing or publishing the impugned label, annexure ..... on 12th july, 2010, as mentioned in the plaint para 11, the plaintiff learnt in november, 2011 that defendant has introduced the country liquor, under the closely similar trade mark label and was infringing the plaintiff's copyright and thus the plaintiff brought the suit in january, 2012. according to the learned counsel, defendant has not shown as to ..... ltd. in 2001 shri kanyalal kimatram kalani created and designed for and on behalf of the m/s. brihan maharashtra sugar syndicate ltd. for valuable consideration, an original artistic trade mark label inter-alia containing the words tango punch? along with the device of a lemon. plaint para 6 mentions that the said company vide date of assignment, assigned the ..... in april, 1997 drugs controller general permitted the respondent company to manufacture drug containing "mefloquine hydrochloride" and permitted the respondent to import the drug. respondent marketed the drug under the trade mark of "falcitab". thus, the suit came to be filed. judgment in the matter of "m/s. s.m. dye-chem ltd." came to be considered. the hon'ble .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 2015 (HC)

The Kopargaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. The Kolhapur Sugar Mil ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... will of this brand is also made. 4. it is the case of the plaintiff that when some manufactures had applied for approval and registration of their trade marks which were similar to the aforesaid trade mark of the plaintiff, plaintiff had taken objections before the authority of excise department and it had filed suits also against many such manufacturers. in the pleading the ..... civil remedy like injunction is available. the aforesaid provisions show that even when the defendants threaten to invade the plaintiff's right in respect of the copy right or the trade mark the relief of injunction is available. 24. learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on case reported as 2012 (2) mh.l.j. 37 bombay high court (sun pharmaceuticals ..... plaintiff has given particulars of those matters. 5. it is the case of the plaintiff that in trade mark suit no.5/2010 filed by the plaintiff against one manufacture konkan agro marine industries private limited (kamipl) in nagpur court this manufacture supplied information that this brand name and ..... provision of order 7 rule 11 of the civil procedure code in the suits filed by the present appellant in respect of its rights under the copyright act 1957 and under the trade marks act 1999. respondents, defendants of both the proceedings had filed applications for rejection of the plaint and these applications are allowed. 3. the plaintiff is a cooperative sugar factory and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 2016 (HC)

Vinay Tilokchand Karnavat Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its Se ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... a special remedy for enforcing it, the remedy provided by that statute alone must be availed of." (2) (1998) 8 supreme court cases 1, whirlpool corporation vs. the registrar of trade marks, mumbai and another, wherein the it is held that: "14. the power to issue prerogative writs under article 226 of the constitution is plenary in nature and is not limited .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 2014 (HC)

Ramesh Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... /s 101. paragraph 19 of the said judgment is relied upon. reliance is placed upon the judgment of the apex court in the case of whirlpool corporation versus registrar of trade marks, mumbai and others, reported at (1998) 8 scc 1 to contend that an alternate remedy can be given a gobye and the high court can entertain such matters since there ..... account extract of c.c. against i.p. mortgage on a/c no.03174000119 in relation to gajanan hatcheries was produced before this court, which is taken on record and marked as 'x' for identification. 10. according to the respondents, all these documents were placed before the competent authority and the petitioner has participated in the proceedings. 11. it is, therefore .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2012 (HC)

Gurdeepsingh S/O Surjitsingh Chabda Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Thro ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... on the following judgments:- (i) state of u.p. and others vs. m/s indian hume pipe co. ltd., : air 1977 supreme court 1132. (ii) whirlpool corporation vs. registrar of trade marks, mumbai and others : air 1999 supreme court 22. (iii) the honble secretary and correspondent, badruka college of commerce and arts (day), hyderabad vs. state of andhra pradesh and others .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2013 (HC)

Nagpur Distillers Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Kopargaon Sahakari Sakhar ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... the defendant no.1 has not only instituted suits against respondent no.2 and applicants herein but the suits are instituted by respondent no.1 for infringement of copyrights and trade marks even against other companies/corporations. according to respondent no.1, it has instituted suits before the district court at kopargaon, against following companies, corporations, factories, distilleries ..... the parties. with their able assistance carefully perused the entire documents/material placed on record by the parties to the applications and also relevant provisions of copyright act, trade marks act, civil procedure code and also the judgments cited by the counsel for the parties across the bar. indisputably, the application filed by the applicants herein under order vii ..... further submitted that, the respondent no.1 herein has not only instituted suits against the applicants herein, but there are other companies which are misusing the copyrights and trade mark of the respondent no.1 and therefore, the respondent no.1 has also instituted suit against other companies before the district court at kopargaon. (j) learned senior ..... for respondent no.1 to attend the proceeding at nagpur. learned senior counsel also submits that the applicants after due permission from the competent authorities and due approval of their trade mark are manufacturing ??hindi ? and ??hindi ? . it is further submitted that, only difference in the suit which are instituted against respondent no.2 and present applicants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (HC)

Vijay Alcoholes and Allied Industries Ltd. Vs. Brihan Karan Sugar Synd ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... filed the suit for permanent injunction, damages, accounts and other reliefs, for infringement of copy right under the copyright act, 1957 and for passing off under the trade marks act, 1999 (copyright act? and trade marks act? in brief). the district judge has granted temporary injunction in favour of plaintiff, restraining the defendant from using, printing or publishing the impugned label, annexure ..... . in april, 1997 drugs controller general permitted the respondent company to manufacture drug containing "mefloquine hydrochloride" and permitted the respondent to import the drug. respondent marketed the drug under the trade mark of "falcitab". thus, the suit came to be filed. judgment in the matter of "m/s. s.m. dyechem ltd." came to be considered. the hon'ble supreme ..... ltd. in 2001 shri kanyalal kimatram kalani created and designed for and on behalf of the m/s. brihan maharashtra sugar syndicate ltd. for valuable consideration, an original artistic trade mark label inter-alia containing the words tango punch? along with the device of a lemon. plaint para 6 mentions that the said company vide date of assignment, assigned the ..... on 12th july, 2010, as mentioned in the plaint para 11, the plaintiff learnt in november, 2011 that defendant has introduced the country liquor, under the closely similar trade mark label and was infringing the plaintiff's copyright and thus the plaintiff brought the suit in january, 2012. according to the learned counsel, defendant has not shown as to .....

Tag this Judgment!


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