Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Court: trademark Page 1 of about 41 results (0.007 seconds)

Mar 29 2005 (TRI)

Nirma Chemical Works Ltd. Vs. Camy Soap and Oil Mnfg. Co. Ltd.

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2005)(31)PTC286Reg

..... malawi in the supply to the market of soap under the name nirma in 1996. the trademark was registered in 1998 under part a, of the trade mark act (cap. 49:01) by camy soap c/o oil company.2. nirma chemical works limited therefore, in this matter is seeking for expangement ..... a household name in india since 1969 and that mr. gaffar is an indian rational who only left india in 1984 should be taken into account. the mark has been advertised in newspapers and tv stations in india and in directories which were sent all over the world. the applicant has firmly established that their ..... to goods for the purpose of indicating, or so as to indicate a connection in the course of trade between the goods and some person having the right to either as proprietor or as registered user to the mark, whether with or without any indication of the identity of that person.' 5. the fundamental point in ..... is proprietor of the mark or registered user of it. in this respect common sense can dictate that ..... the definition is that the mark must be used in relation to goods so as to indicate a connection in the course of trade between the goods and some person who .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 2005 (TRI)

P.M. Diesels Ltd. Vs. Daimler Chrysler Ag

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2005)(31)PTC275Reg

..... was not likely to be any confusion. the appeal was dismissed with cost".it is also held "one cannot leave out any part of the applicants' trade mark in -comparing the marks (re farrow's trade mark 7 r.p.c 260).regard must be had to the class of goods and the class of customers. in dealing with some goods sound is of ..... and machine tools, motors (except for land vehicles) machine coupling, beltings (except for land vehicles) large size of agriculture implements and incubators' in case of the opponents' trade mark whereas the applicants' trade mark is sought to be registered in respect of 'diesel oil engines and parts thereof, electric motors, monoblock pumps, submersible pumps, centrifugal pumps and parts thereof. between the two ..... which the applicants had successfully produced evidence of use and reputation in respect of their goods.since the opponents have failed to establish that the impugned trade mark is deceptively or confusingly similar to their registered trade mark 'benz', the objection raised under section 9(2)(a) for refusal of the impugned application on obsolete ground is not maintainable, hence stands rejected. ..... as all shopmen do would be likely to be led to pass off upon that customer a 'neola' instead of 'pianola'.further, before applying for registration of the impugned trade mark, the applicant filed a request on form tm-54 for preliminary search in class 7 and obtained nil report. secondly, the registrar has straightway accepted the application for registration .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 2002 (TRI)

Kalyanpuri Flour Mills Private Vs. Jugal Kishore Harbanslal

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2002)(25)PTC694Reg

..... to the words shakti bhog atta and elephant brand. he further stated that 50% of the above sales turnover relates to the goods under the trade mark elephant brand and the device of an elephant which means all the sales figures are vague. moreover, there is not a single instance of actual ..... 30 and he has been using the said trade mark since the year 1954 continuously and extensively throughout india in respect of the goods mentioned above. by reason of long and continuous use, advertisement, sales ..... opponent.6. mr. m.k. miglani, advocate, the learned counsel for the opponent submitted that opponent is the registered proprietor of the trade mark consisting of the device of an elephant and the words haathi chaap in respect of gram flour (besan) and gram dall (broken) both in class ..... request made by the opponent. the matter eventually came up for a hearing before me on 9th march, 2000, when mr. v. balakrish-nan, registered trade mark attorney for the applicants and mr. m.k. miglani, advocate instructed by m/s. world wide registration bureau, new delhi appeared on behalf of the ..... 'opponent') filed a notice of opposition to the aforesaid application inter alia on the following grounds :- (i) that the opponent is the proprietor of the trade mark consisting of the device of an elephant and the words elephant brand in respect of 'flour, gram flour, besan, rice, atta and gram dall and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 2001 (TRI)

Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba Vs. Tosiba Appliances Company

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2002)(24)PTC654Reg

..... kaihsa v. shayammo master, air 1985 bombay 327: ptc (suppl)(1) 622.-in this case the high court of mumbai upheld the decision of the registrar of trade marks allowing the registration of trade marks sony in respect of nail polish disallowing opposition entered by the appellant who are the company incorporated in japan manufacturing goods like tv, tape recorders, etc. under their ..... dishonesty because the other side had delayed in coming to court and i have a large stake in the sales which i am effecting by reason or using a trade mark which resembles the trade mark of another." therefore, the argument put forward by mr. shah of balance of convenience, of hardship, of equity has no application on the facts of this case ..... i cannot imagine that a foreign use or use abroad or outside india could be pleaded as a sufficient ground for retaining a registered trade mark on the indian trade mark register. i am of the opinion that registration of a trade mark and its continuance on the register are exclusively within the scope and ambit of domestic and national law.the "international convention for the ..... in class 9 failed to oppose the aforesaid registration in favour of the appellants. the respondents initiated the rectification proceedings before the registrar of trade marks who ordered to remove the trade mark of the appellant telerad from the register of trade marks. the appellant filed appeal before the high court of delhi the high court held as under:- "there is no doubt that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 2001 (TRI)

Anthony Kavalakattu Trading as Vs. E.M.i. Records Limited

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2002)(24)PTC738Reg

..... adopt the unique combination even if the goods are different. i say that the applicants have dishonestly copied the concept behind the impugned trade mark from my company's said trade mark by taking all essential features from my company's trade mark. it is absolutely absurd to say that no person with proper sense will believe that there is any connection between the applicants' ..... its registered user, viz., the gramophone company of india ltd., calcutta. by virtue of vast publicity and long standing use and also high standard of goods sold under the trade mark device of dog and the words his master's voice, the opponents enjoy much valuable reputation and goodwill throughout world including india and they also exclusively associated by the members ..... . the gramophone company of india ltd., calcutta ; (iii) by virtue of extensive registrations, vast publicity and extensive use and also high standard of quality of goods sold under the trade mark device of dog and the words 'his master's voice' the opponents enjoy much valuable reputation and goodwill throughout the world including india and have also exclusively associated by the ..... in part a of the register subject to disclaimer of the words deluxe and choice appearing on the label. the said application was eventually advertised as accepted for registration in trade marks journal no. 1128 dated 1st february, 1996 at page 3043.2. m/s. emi records limited, a company incorporated in england at 135, blyth road, hayes, middlesex, england ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 2001 (TRI)

A. Krishna (Dr.) Vs. Research Drugs and Pharmaceuticals

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2002)(25)PTC677Reg

..... 1. that the opponents carry on a well established business as manufacturers, dealers, exporters in medicinal & pharmaceutical products for last several years under the trade mark 'ludem' with their other trade marks. 2. that the opponents adopted the trade mark 'ludem' on or about february, 1986 and they had been continuously and extensively using the same in respect of their products since then. 3 ..... examined the opponents' as well as the applicants' evidences in the aforesaid paragraphs. it appears from the evidence filed by the opponents that they conceived and adopted the trade mark 'ludem' even before 1986, when they applied for the requisite drug licence and sales tax registration. they obtained drug license and drug content approval from the competent authority ..... , a director of the opponents' company alongwith supporting documents affirming and stating therein the annual sales figure of their product sold under the said trade mark 'ludem' from the year 1986 to 1989. the trade mark 'ludem' is affirmed and stated to have been used by the opponents since feb., 1986 vide para 3 of their aforesaid affidavit.the annual ..... by way of his affidavit without stating and affirming annual sales turnover of their goods therein, the applicants dr. a.krishna affirms and states to have used the impugned trade mark in his dispensed unit, namely 'dermprep dispensed dermatologicals' by prescribing the medicines to their patients since the year 1974 and in support of the said affidavit, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 2002 (TRI)

B. Rosaiah Vs. F. Hoffman La Roche Ag

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2002)(25)PTC134Reg

..... in para 10 of the notice of opposition as baseless and ill founded. they empathetically denied the alleged use and reputation of the opponents' trade mark and contended that their trade mark was entirely different from the opponents' trade mark both visually and phonetically. they added that both the products i.e. 'bactoprim d.s.' and 'bactrim' are scheduled drugs and can ..... countered the arguments advanced by the learned advocate on behalf of the opponents, nor convinced this tribunal as to how and why the impugned trade mark is not deceptively similar to the opponents' registered trade mark and thus, they appear to have lost their interest in prosecuting the impugned application.moreover, hearing notice sent to the applicants is returned by ..... regards objection raised under section 11(e) of the act, in view of my findings that the impugned trade mark is deceptively and confusingly similar to the opponents' registered trade mark, and the adoption of the impugned trade mark is false and dishonest, the mark applied for is not entitled for protection in the court of law. the objection raised under section 11(e ..... weyth & bros. inc, 143 f. 2d 977, 979, 31 ccpa 1217 (1944).21. public interest would support lesser degree of proof showing confusing similarity in the case of trade mark in respect of medicinal product as against other non-medicinal products. drugs are poisons not sweets. confusion between medicinal products may, therefore, be life threatening, not merely inconvenient. noting .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 2002 (TRI)

Parivar Seva Sanstha Vs. Bliss Chemicals and

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2002)(24)PTC764Reg

..... than 100 lakhs of rupees for the entire period shown. in this connection, the applicants have filed invoices and also some more invoices pertaining to the trade mark bliss. all these invoices carry the trade mark bliss of the applicants.the invoices also indicate that sales of bliss products have been made all over the country, including inter-alia the national capital ..... after conducting the search.21. it is evident from the evidence filed by the applicants that the applicants have been marketing their products under branded category including condoms under the trade mark bliss under the contraceptive social marketing programme of the ministry of health & family welfare, govt. of india. the affidavit filed by mr. shailendra singh also show that there ..... tm-7 to attend the hearing. ultimately, the matter came up for hearing before me on 7th december, 2001 when shri ajay sahni, advocate instructed by m/s international trade mark bureau bombay appeared for the opponents and shri n.k. anand, advocate, miss satya siva swami, advocate and miss ritu singh ghuman, advocate appeared for the applicants. the ..... its office at skypak house annexe, marol, andheri (east), bombay-400059 (hereinafter referred to as the opponents) gave a notice of their intention to oppose the registration of the trade mark advertised, as aforesaid, on the following grounds :- 1. that the opponents have been carrying on a well established business as manufacturers and dealers inter alia in medicinal and pharmaceutical .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 2002 (TRI)

Fourts (India) Laboratories Vs. Gufic Private Limited

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2003)(26)PTC367Reg

..... they are proprietors of several trade marks in respect of the said goods. one amongst such trade marks is the trade mark 'mol', which has been used by the opponents in respect of their aforesaid goods since the year 1977. the registration of the said ..... sustained the opponents' objections under different sections, i find no reason to exercise my said discretion adversely to the opponents. i am satisfied that the opponents have been using the trade mark 'mol' since the year 1977 and they are the registered proprietors of the same under no. 384721 as of 30.12.1981 and vested with statutory exclusive right in the ..... dated 9.10.2001. ultimately, the matter came up for final hearing before me on 22,11.2001, when none appeared for hearing.however, the opponents' attorneys inter continental trade mark bureau vide their letter dated 29.10.2001 submitted that due to indifferent health of the advocate, who is well acquainted with the facts of the case and is to ..... , ville parle (east), bombay-57, (hereinafter referred to as opponents) lodged a notice of their intention on form tm-5 dated 11.9.1987 to oppose registration of the impugned trade mark 'moly' inter alia stating the grounds of opposition as follows:- (1) the opponents carry on an old, established business as manufacturers and merchants in (pharmaceutical and medicinal preparations) and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 2003 (TRI)

Poonam Electricals Vs. Ranjit Electronics

Court : Trademark

Reported in : (2003)(26)PTC284Reg

..... of goods of the opponent since the year 1984, under these circumstances, it is in evidence that the opponent had been using the trade mark consisting of trade mark duke and has made substantial use as indicated by the figure of sales as stated in the affidavit.19. under these circumstances, the ..... of section 9 of the act. as per the provisions of section 9 of the act, in general terms, distinctiveness of a trade mark must be that the trade mark distinguish the goods of its proprietor from the similar goods sold by other persons. in the instant case, it has already been held ..... 1) 13(sc) "the reputation with which we are concerned in the present case is the reputation of the trade mark and not that of the maker of the goods bearing that trade mark. a trade mark may acquire a reputation in connection with the goods in respect of which it is used though a buyer may ..... is prior in adoption and use and has gained a substantial reputation by way of extensive use of the trade mark duke. that being so, the mark applied for which consists of trade mark duke is likely to deceive or cause confusion in the minds of the purchasers when used by the applicant ..... selling, offering for sale, advertising directly or indirectly dealing in electrical accessories or other allied or cognate goods under the trade mark duke or any other identical or deceptively similar trade mark. the said order of injunction is still in operation.10. in the aforementioned suit, the applicant alongwith the written statement .....

Tag this Judgment!


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