Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Court: punjab and haryana Page 1 of about 8,704 results (0.075 seconds)

Nov 30 1951 (HC)

Watkins Mayor and Co. Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Bombay and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1952P& H266

..... defined in section 219 of the government of india act, 1935.'it is true that abdur rahman, j., in 'abdul ghani ahmed v. registrar of trade marks', air 1947 lah 171, said that unless there was a branch registry in the punjab an appeal from the registrar's decision, whether given at bombay ..... whose jurisdiction that district court is situated.' under this section das, j., when he was incalcutta observed in 'india electric works ltd. v. registrar of trade marks', 51 cal w n 42 at p. 54:'it is not quite intelligible as to what is precisely meant by the expression 'high court having jurisdiction' ..... the registrar under this act or the rules made thereunder to the high cours having jurisdiction: 'provided that if any suit or other proceeding concerning the trade-mark in question is pending before a high court or a district court, the appeal shall be made to that high court, or, as the case ..... high court or to the registrar, the tribunal may make such order as it may think fit for cancelling or varying the registration of a trade mark on the ground of any contravention of, or failure to observe a condition entered on the register in relation thereto.(2) any person aggrieved by ..... which is sought tobe executed has been placed on the record. it isa very comprehensive decree and it cannot besaid that it is not concerning the trade-mark inquestion, and it is not necessary at this stage togive any final adjudication upon the point, but forthe purpose of seeing whether this court wouldhave .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 1968 (HC)

J. and P. Coats Ltd. Vs. Gurcharan Singh and Brothers and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1969P& H290

..... for passing off goods as the goods of another person, or the remedies in respect thereof. section 28 enumerates the rights conferred by registration of a trade-mark.the 1958 act has replaced the trade-marks act, 1940, which has been repealed under section 136 of the 1958 act. sub-section (4) of section 136 provides that notwithstanding anything contained ..... of khatau makanji, spinning and weaving company limited, of messrs. petlad turkey red dye works company limited, and of messrs. aryadaya ginning and manufacturing company, ahmedabad, the trade-marks of all of which business concerns contained the device of elephant. the witness admitted the said fact, but added that though the application of messrs. vishram bhagwandas and ..... the plaintiff filed this suit in the principal civil court of original jurisdiction at amritsar to restrain the respondents, their partners, employees, representatives, agents and servants from using their trade-mark 'jagjit hathi brand' in respect of sewing threads of all kinds manufactured, sold, distributed or dealt with by the respondents, and to direct the respondents by a mandatory ..... , additional district judge, amritsar, dated august 4, 1958, dismissing the plaintiff's suit for a permanent injunction and accounts arising out of the alleged infringement of two registered trade-marks of the appellant are these:messrs. j. and p. coats limited, an english company having its registered office in glasgow, scotland (hereinafter called the plaintiff), has for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 1972 (HC)

The General Electric Co. of India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Pyara Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1974P& H14

..... of 15 years with effect from 8-8-1952. the general electric company of india ltd., magnet house, chittaranjan avenue, calcutta, are the registered users of the aforesaid trade mark. earlier to this, the trade mark of the said company stood registered at no. 112521 for the said goods from 8-8-1945 for a period of seven years. this is quite evident from ..... been passing off their lamp-holders as those of the plaintiff-company. therefore, the suit is decreed and the injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and agents from infringing the trade mark is issued. the defendants, their servants and agents are further restrained from putting up and offering for sale and selling and/or causing to be put up or offered for ..... purchaser of ordinary intelligence who had earlier purchased the g.e.c. lampholders, would be in a position to appreciate these minor differences if there is phonetic similarity in the trade marks or similarity otherwise between the two lampholders. it is not denied that the size, shape, hole and all other things of both the lampholders are of similar nature and it ..... in the lighting of the electric lamps. therefore, merely because the lampholders are not specifically mentioned in the registration certificate, on that ground alone, it cannot be found that the trade mark of the lampholders is not registered for the plaintiff-company. the words in the registration certificate in respect of 'apparatus, devices and fittings for use with electric lights and electric .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 1954 (HC)

Tapton Tea Company Vs. the Liptons Ltd. and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1954P& H270

..... remark by das, j., in -- 'the india electric works ltd. v. registrar of trade marks', air 1947 cal 49 (c), which reads:'it is not quite intelligible as to what is precisely meant by the expression 'high court having jurisdiction' in ..... the registrar, the application shall lie to the high court within whose jurisdiction the district court is situated if any suit or other proceeding concerning the trade mark is pending.the suit itself was not pending in that case, but execution proceedings in connection with it were. reliance was also placed on a ..... in the case cited above that another office for registration of trade marks had been opened at calcutta, and obviously appeals against the orders of an officer at calcutta would lie to the high court there. it seems ..... instead of using the phrase 'the high court having jurisdiction.' i do not agree with this argument since obviously the office of the registrar of trade marks could at any time be transferred from bombay to some other place, and in fact it would appear from certain observations of abdur rahman, j. ..... located at amritsar and the objection has been taken that the appeal should have been filed in the high court at bombay.3. section 76(1), trade marks act, 1940, under which the appeal has been filed reads: 'save as otherwise expressly provided in this act, an appeal shall lie, within the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1955 (HC)

In Re: Om Parkash Karam Chand

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1956P& H4

..... the prohibition of registration, of certain matters, and when quoted it runs as under: '8. no trade mark nor part of a trade mark shall be registered which consists of, or contains, any scandalous design, or any matter the use or which would- (a) by reason of its being likely to deceive ..... (c) be contrary to any law for the time being in force or to morality'. section 24 reads: '24. in all legal proceedings relating to a registered trade mark, the original registration of the trade mark shall after the expiration of seven years from the date of such original registration be taken to be valid in all respects unless such registration was obtained by ..... application for registration it was not distinctive. (5) falshaw j. on 21-12-1954 framed a preliminary issue: 'is the petition maintainable in view of the provisions of section 24, trade marks act'. 6. i am of the opinion that this petition as framed is incompetent. section 6 of the act gives requirements which are requisite for registration. section 8 lays down ..... facts being disclosed, that the registration is calculated to prejudice and interfere with the applicant's busi- ness and that the opposite party is not entitled tothe use of the trade mark. in para 15 he submitted that the registrationwas calculated to deceive and confuse the customers and it interfered prejudicially in the tradeof the applicant and he therefore prayed for rectification .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1955 (HC)

Firm Bhagwan Dass Ramjilal, Iron Merchants and Golden Engineering Work ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1956P& H17

..... ) reads:--'20(1) no person shall be entitled to institute any proceeding to prevent, or to recover damages for, the infringement of an unregistered trade mark unless such trade mark has been continuously in use since before the 25th day of february, 1937, by such person or by a predecessor-in-title of his and ..... d. w. 4, it is ordered that during execution proceeding at the expense of defendants 1 to 3 an attempt shall be made to efface the present trade marks on them. if the attempt is successful, those knives shall be delivered to defendants 1 to 3. in the latter case, rs. 5,250/- and ..... filing of the suit cannot be said to satisfy the terms of this section.the present case, however, does not relate to an infringement of a registered trade mark. it is in substance a passing off action against the defendants and such an action is maintainable under sub-clause (2) of section 20 which reads ..... application has been refused.'the contention of the appellant-firm is that under this section the plaintiffs should have made an application for registration of the trade mark and that without such an application the suit was barred. it appears that in the present case the plaintiffs did make an application under this ..... any case the defendants' sale was very small.4. the trial court held that the suit in the present form was competent and section 20, trade marks act, 1940 was not a bar to it. on the merits the trial court found relying on the oral and documentary evidence produced by the plaintiffs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 15 1971 (HC)

Shanti Devi and ors. Vs. General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Ambala and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1972P& H65

..... or not. our statutes are full of instances where appeals or revisions to courts are provided as against the decisions of designated persons and tribunals. see for example, advocates act, trade marks act. reference in this connection may usefully be made to the decisions in 1953 scr 1028 = (air 1953 sc 357 (to which reference has already been made) and the secy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 17 2006 (HC)

Abhishek Mills Limited Vs. Abhishek Industries Limited

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2006)144PLR376

..... in the present appeal.2. the facts are that abhishek industries limited trident complex raikot road barnala (hereinafter to be referred to as the respondent) filed a civil suit under trade marks act 1999 against the appellant m/s abhishek mills limited gat no. 148. tamgaon kolhapur-hupari raod taulka karveer district kolhapur maharasthra (hereinafter to be referred to as the appellant ..... also not in consonance with judicial pronouncements coming down from the hon'ble apex court. the appellant has been restrained by the injunction order from running its business in the trade/corporate name abhishek without hearing it therefore the present case falls in the exceptional clause laid down in the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent.20 ..... to passing off its goods and business as those of the plaintiff and the respondent company is further restrained from issuing its initial forthcoming public offer/public issue under the trade and corporate name 'abhishek' and/or any deceptive variation thereof till further orders.notice of the application be issued to the respondents for 20.7.2006 on which the file ..... the appellant submitted its draft red herring prospectus to the securities and exchange board of india (in short sebi). the appellant was carrying out its business activities under an identical trade name till the first week of june 2006. the respondent is aggrieved more by the proposed initial public offer by which the appellant is intending to go to public and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 1966 (HC)

United Iron and Steel Works Vs. Government of India, Trade Marks Regis ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1967P& H64

..... state in writing the materials used by him in arriving at his said decision. in pursuance of the requirement of the said notice under rule 41 (1) of the trade marks and merchandise marks, rules, 1959, (hereinafter referred to as the central rules), the assistant registrar gave his detailed judgment dated march 21, 1964, against which the present appeal has been preferred. ..... but also include his other goods for which a separate application for registration has been made and is stated to be still pending. the extent to which a particular trade mark has been adapted to distinguish by being used by a particular manufacturer would normally depend upon the extent relating to all the goods manufactured by the particular applicant and not ..... attached a copy of the invoice of the appellant showing that the goods were, in fact supplied. each of the relevant indent describes the goods indented with reference to the trade mark 'uis'. a reference to these vouchers does show that the appellant has been engaged in extensive business spread over different states and has been dealing with substantial number of persons ..... why the application should not be refused for the reason stated in the preceding paragraph.'in the same communication the appellant was directed to address all further correspondence to the trade marks registry at delhi.3. in his reply dated september 5, 1963, the appellant authorised the requisite amendments being made in the original application and added that the appellant was ' .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1972 (HC)

Kelvinator of India Limited Vs. the State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : [1973]32STC283(P&H)

..... 6, but this fact alone would not make much difference especially when there is no evidence that the machines, when they left the factory, were not labelled 'kelvinator', the trade mark which has been assigned to spencers. if there was evidence that-the machines had left without any label, possibly the contention that the machines were not appropriated to the spencer ..... the buyers and sellers together cannot be brushed aside. the refrigerators are earmarked for delivery to the specific distributors the moment they are manufactured in the factory under a given trade mark. judged in the context of agreement discussed above, the dealer has absolutely no choice or option in the selection of buyers and he is bound to sell a kelvinator ..... sales made to the distributors. the relevant parts of the order of the assessing authority are quoted below :during the year under assessment the dealer manufactured and sold refrigerators with trade marks of 'kelvinator', 'leonard' and 'gem'. the sale of each brand was made through a separate distributor appointed for this purpose. i have studied the agreements in respect of each ..... buy all products manufactured by the company as mutually agreed upon from time to time. the distributors shall have the right to sell the company's kelvinator and such other trade mark products, spare parts and parts within the territory. due consideration to the recommendation of the distributors in regard to change/alteration in existing products or additions of new products .....

Tag this Judgment!


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