Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Page 11 of about 182,041 results (0.171 seconds)

Nov 02 1955 (HC)

S.M. NooruddIn Vs. Mahomed Oomer Mahomed Nurulla Saheb

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1956Bom641

..... during that period.now, it is true that the present opponent was a minor but his father who was the proprietor of the trade mark and whose right to the trade mark had been admitted by the panchnama was alive till 1942 i.e., for about 5 years from the date of the panchnama. that ..... which would establish the fact that the opponent had such knowledge.this contention of mr. laud must, therefore, fail and the order of the trade marks registrar refusing registration in these seven districts as well as the rest of india will stand.11. the next question that has been urged on ..... therefore extend the time during which the respondent or his father could have reasonably contended that they were entitled to stop the petitioner from using the trade mark any further. in my opinion, therefore, the cross-objections of the opponent on this particular point must fail.10. it is next urged by ..... affidavits were put in on behalf of the opponent.these affidavits were of three persons who had been previously examined and cross-examined before the trade marks registrar in the prior proceedings. the affidavits set out in estenso the evidence given by the deponents before the learned registrar and confirmed the said ..... has a direct hearing on some of the questions that have been canvassed before me on this appeal.2. the petitioner applied for registration of his trade mark known as 'hautin' in respect of bidis, cigars, scented tobacco and tobacco throughout india on 21-8-1942. the application was advertised on 1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 2009 (HC)

Waman S/O Manjiram Hebare Vs. Ramesh S/O Manjiram Hebare

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR4368

..... the respondent is the proprietor of 'm/s hebare and sons' and his firm is in the business of production of sewing machines under the trade name and trade mark 'hebare'. he has been doing business for the last 20 years and has earned goodwill and reputation in the market. the sewing machines are being sold in districts ..... favour of present respondent plaintiff for consideration of rs. 5,000/=.9. it is also argued before me by learned counsel for the appellant, relying upon section 45 of the trade marks act, 1999, that unless registration of assignment is done, the respondent appellant cannot claim protection under the act. section 45 reads:45. registration of assignments and transmissions.(1) where ..... for rs. 5000/= and he thus became owner thereof from the date of deed of assignment. in the circumstances, plaintiff sought temporary injunction restraining present appellant defendant from using the trade mark 'hebare'.4. appellant defendant appeared and filed written statement. according to him, he was selling his products under registered name and style 'amit and ajinkya'. the surname of the ..... 2008 by the learned district judge-ii, jalna below application exhibit 6 in regular civil suit no. 2 of 1980. by the impugned order, the defendants were restrained from using trade mark 'hebare' of the respondent.2. briefly stated, the respondent is the original plaintiff who filed application exhibit 6 before the trial court for injunction regarding infringement and passing off. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 2009 (HC)

V. Pichandi Sole Proprietor Shri Ambika Match Works Through Its G.P.A. ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2010(1)BomCR394; 2010(112)BomLR114

..... the plaintiff/appellant has filed suit against the respondents for relief of perpetual injunction restraining them from selling safety matches, manufactured and marketed by them using the offending trade mark, which is similar to the trade mark on the safety matches manufactured by the plaintiff and for interim protection, application exh.5 is filed.3. as per plaintiff/appellant he is proprietor of distinctive ..... pending before the madras high court. if this appeal is allowed and temporary injunction as prayed is granted, that would be preventing the respondent no. 1 from using his registered trade mark. all material issues raised before this court were in issue before the appellate board and now madras high court is seized with the matter. so, if any interim order ..... . so, the proceedings before the appellate board was application under section 125 for rectification of register by the present appellant made to the appellate board for cancellation of registration of trade mark in favour of defendant no. 1 (respondent no. 1).10. present plaintiff/appellant has pleaded before the appellate board same case as is made out before this court. as ..... the label. there is difference in the kind of work and display of label. therefore, the district court believed that such deviation was not approved by the registrar of the trade mark. in absence of registration of colour combination and size, the trial court refused to hold that there is case for grant of injunction. in para 15 of the impugned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2007 (HC)

i.T.C. Limited Vs. G.T.C. Industries Ltd. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(2)BomCR132; (2008)110BOMLR259; 2008(2)MhLj922; LC2008(1)194

..... 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, ifa) it is of such nature as to deceive the public or cause confusion;b) it contains or comprises of any ..... he has no domicile within the union but is a national of a country of the union, the country of which he is a nation.b. trade marks covered by this article may be neither denied registration nor invalidated except in the following cases:1. when they are of such a nature as to ..... sub-section 3 of section 159 is reproduced asthe provisions of this act shall apply to any application for registration of a trade mark pending at the commencement of this act and to any proceedings consequent thereon and to any registration granted in pursuance thereof.14. another submission is about ..... 16/08/2002. 12. sub-section (3) of section 159 provides that the provisions of this act shall apply to any application for registration of the trade mark pending at the commencement of the t.m. act-1999 and to any proceedings consequent thereon and also to any registration granted in pursuance thereof. 13. ..... with no order as to cost. the counsel for respondent no. 1 has given an assurance that respondent no. 1 would not collect the certificate of trade mark for a period of 4 weeks.10. on 16/08/2002, the appellants filed the present appeal. 11. the learned senior counsel dr. virendra tulzapurkar .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 06 2007 (HC)

Kores (India) Limited Vs. Whale Stationery Products Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)110BOMLR276; 2008(3)MhLj523; LC2008(1)155; 2008(36)PTC463(Bom)

..... the position, the action by the plaintiff for infringement can validly be founded on the rights of the plaintiff as a registered proprietor under sections 28 and 29 of the trade marks act, 1999. the plaintiff has made out a primafacie case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction both on the basis of infringement and passing off. considering the fact ..... or for that matter a continuous or concurrent user within the territory of india. on the contrary, it would appear that the plaintiff who is the registered proprietor of the trade mark kores and the associated device has an established goodwill and reputation associated with its business in stationery products, more particularly duplicating stencils. 17. the defendants have submitted that they are ..... behalf of the plaintiff, it has been submitted that the averments contained in paragraph 6 of the plaint would interalia show that there has been an extensive use of the trade mark kores by the plaintiff in india since its incorporation in 1956. the goods were initially, according to the plaintiff, imported by a british company which held shares in the ..... instituted a suit against the plaintiff in germany for infringement and passing of. an order of injunction was issued by a court in germany restraining the plaintiff from using the trade mark kores in respect of office stationery products in germany. according to the plaintiff in or about april 2007, it obtained knowledge of the circumstance that the second defendant was exporting .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 24 2009 (HC)

Paragon Steels (P) Ltd. Rep. by Its Managing Director, Mr. M. Paramasi ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2009KAR3446; 2009(6)KarLJ566:2009(5)AIRKarR431

..... fourth schedule to the act then there is no bar for using the same for goods and services specified under different clauses, except when the trade mark is a 'well known trade mark'.10. in the impugned order the trial court held that the trademark of plaintiffs is a well-known trademark. section 2(1)(zg) of the act, defines what ..... a well-known trademark.section 6 and 7 of section 11 of the act former specifies what are the relevant facts to be taken into consideration while determining 'well known trade mark'. section 8 of section 11 of the act specifies that if a trademark has been determined to be well-known in at least one relevant section of the public in ..... the names, different types of rubber products, foot wear and its allied parts. on the other hand the defendants are dealing in twisted steel rods. there can be number of trade marks containing the same name comfortably co-exist when they are associated with different goods or services and in different business jurisdictions. when registration is made in a particular clause in ..... relation to certain type of goods from the year 1975 and the same was registered in the year 1987. on the other hand the defendants are using the same trade mark for different goods from the year 1983. therefore at this stage the balance of convenience is not in favour of plaintiffs.13. the word 'passing off means that the defendants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2006 (HC)

Reebok India Company (a Company Registered Under the Companies Act) Re ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2006KAR3961; 2007(34)PTC164(Karn)

..... i am' and therefore the plaintiff alone can claim rights over the said slogan as a trade mark.4. the defendants contended that:(1) as per section 2(1)(w) of the trade marks act, 1999, the expression, 'registered trade mark' means a trade mark which is actually on the register of trade marks maintained by the government of india and which is in force. admittedly, the slogan, 'i am ..... manufactured by the plaintiff. whether there is, prima facie, any deception resulting in passing off and consequent loss or likelihood of damage to the plaintiff, is not forthcoming. the registered trade mark of both the parties are totally different. they can be easily distinguished. whether the usage of the general phrase 'i am what i am' has resulted in any such confusion ..... the facts of the present case.8. per contra the learned counsel for the respondent supports the findings recorded by the court below contending that the definition of the expression 'trade mark' includes even a set of words. he draws the attention of the court to the following reported decisions:i) laxmikant v. patel v. chetanbhai shah and anr. : air2002sc275 ;ii) satyam ..... 'i am what i am'. the appellants herein are aggrieved by the grant of temporary injunction restraining them from using the logo 'i am what i am' along with their trade mark.2. the appellants herein are defendants in the suit, o.s.no. 16861/2005 filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking permanent injunction against them restraining them from using on their .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 2005 (HC)

Chennai Hotel Saravana Bhavan and ors. Vs. Hotel Saravana Bhavan

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2005(4)ALD263; 2005(3)ALT789

..... with the registrar of firms bearing no. 49/2004 on 15-6-2004 and also made a representation to the registrar to get the trade mark registered under the trade marks act, 1999 and the government of india trade marks registry assigned no. 12899989. thus since april, 1998, the plaintiff's firm is doing hotel business under the name and style of hotel ..... facts and circumstances of the case, i shall now first proceed to consider whether any of the parties can claim exclusive rights over the trade mark and whether the provisions of the trade marks act insofar as infringement of trade mark is concerned.20. at the outset, it must be remembered that for claiming exclusive right over a trademark, one has to register ..... this case, the plaintiff which was carrying on internet business through domain name starting with words 'sify' sought injunction for passing off action, under section 29 of the trade marks act, against the defendant, which subsequently started business under domain name 'siffynet'. the fact that plaintiff is the largest internet service providers in the country and the reputation and ..... for permanent injunction under section 51 of the copyright act was filed for passing off and copyright. the plaintiff was manufacturing pharmaceutical preparations for veterinary use under the trade mark nilverm with design container label registered as copyright while the defendant was manufacturing and marketing same drug bearing trademark as nilsole. the packing material of the defendant was a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2005 (HC)

Pandugula Vali Basha Vs. N. Mohammed Haris and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2005(4)ALT760

..... while making the purchases. as it is not possible for any customer even dealing specially in such goods to make any distinction between the trade mark 'exite' and trade mark 'exide', defendant, prima facie, appear to have used this particular trade mark 'exide' with a view to cause confusion amongst the customers nd to take benefit of the reputation built up by the plaintiff with respect ..... 616, the issue is not to be determined by a comparison of he emblems in dispute. the relevant passage at page 616 to 618 in the text book 'law of trade marks and trade names' by kerly, may be usefully extracted hereunder:'two important questions are suggested by the sections concerned with deceptive resemblance: a. who are the persons whom the resemblance must ..... registered user using by way of permitted use; and(ii) that when he became aware of the existence and nature of the plaintiff's right in the trade mark, he forthwith ceased to use the trade mark in relation to goods in respect of which it was registered; or(c) where in a suit for passing off the defendant satisfies the court-(i) that ..... clothes (virendra dresses v. varindera garments - : air1982delhi482 ).considering the decided cases and evidence in this case including material objects produced and oral evidence, we are of the opinion that the trade mark 'nambisan's' used by the plaintiff and 'nambeesan' used by the defendants are deceptively similar and public are likely to be deceived as phonetically the names are deceptively similar and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 26 2007 (HC)

Adepu Surendra Vs. Adepu Ravindra

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2007(6)ALD718

..... and petitioner-plaintiff started quarrelling for family partition. it is stated that the plaintiff published about the trade mark in west godavari, but not published in karimnagar where the respondent-defendant is living and carrying business. it is further stated that when the father of the petitioner ..... plaintiff. it is also stated that the plaintiff fraudulently without knowledge of the father or himself obtained a registration certificate on 29.9.2004 in respect of the trade mark of adepu 222, photo of his grandfather with brand name of device label being used in respect of goods manufactured by the joint family after getting fraudulent registration ..... out by the respondent-petitioner-plaintiff, granting of temporary injunction is not just and proper. the learned counsel also had pointed out to the relevant statutory provisions under the trade marks act, 1999. the learned counsel also placed strong reliance on certain decisions.4. per contra, sri hema prakash rao, learned counsel representing the respondent-petitioner-plaintiff would ..... representing the appellant-respondent-defendant would submit that the relationship between the parties is not in controversy and the fact that the respondent obtained the registration of the trade mark without putting the other family members on notice also is not in serious controversy. the learned counsel would submit that the label popularly known as 'adepu 222 and .....

Tag this Judgment!


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