Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Page 2 of about 182,500 results (0.160 seconds)

Jun 29 1962 (HC)

A.R. Khaleel and Sons Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks in India

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1963Mys122

..... other appellate jurisdiction (vide national sewing thread co., ltd. v. james chadwick and bros., ltd., : [1953]4scr1028 .6. it was nextly contended by sri chandrasekhar that even though a trade mark satisfied the requirements for eligibility under section 6(1) of the act, the applicant did not have the right to have it registered and that the registrar had a discretion ..... american law institute), it is stated as follows:'that a designation may have a suggestive significance in connection with the goods does not render it inappropriate for use as a trade-mark. the test is the imaginativeness involved in the suggestion, that is, whether the suggestion is so close and direct that it is apparently descriptive and generally useful in approximately ..... 'speed master' as a trade mark. the main grounds for the refusal are (1) that the expression 'speed master' is not an invented word and (2) that this expression in relation to watches or clocks, ..... asked by a letter dated 3-10-1958 for a hearing before final orders were passed. in response to this letter, the registrar directed the ex-officio deputy registrar of trade marks to give a hearing to the applicant. consequently, the ex-officio deputy registrar heard the applicant's advocate and after considering the arguments, refused the application for registration of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 1964 (SC)

Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma Vs. Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laborato ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1965SC980; [1965]1SCR737

..... : '(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 ..... 1952 in the high court of travancore-cochin praying that the registration of the word 'navaratna' by itself or as part of other marks as a trade mark for goods belonging to the respondent be removed from the register. civil appeal 523 of 1962 arises out of the order of the high ..... proviso to s. 6(3) of the of the act. the plaintiff was, therefore, granted a decree for an injunction confined to the trade mark 'navaratna pharmaceutical laboratories'. 9. from this judgment the appellant filed an appeal to the high court and the learned judges heard the appeal along ..... him under the name 'navaratna kalpa'. while so, in october, 1946, he applied for the registration of the words 'navaratna kalpa' as a trade mark for his medicinal preparations. this application was advertised in april, 1950, and the respondent-firm opposed the application for registration on the ground that the ..... from january, 1945 the name of the business was changed to the present one - navaratna pharmaceutical laboratories. from the very beginning the proprietors used the trade mark 'navaratna' on the products which they manufactured and sold. in december, 1928 the word 'navaratna' and the name 'navaratna pharmacy' as connoting the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 09 1996 (SC)

Vishnudas Trading as Vishnudas Kishandas Vs. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1996SC2275; 1996(2)ARBLR222(SC); JT1996(6)SC366; 1996(5)SCALE267; (1997)4SCC201; [1996]Supp3SCR329

..... to the cigarettes bearing the said brand name falling under class 34 of the 4th schedule of the trade mark rules framed under the trade marks act 1940. the schedule in trade marks rules 1942 continues verbatim as the 4th schedule of trade marks rules framed under the trade marks act. the trade mark 'charminar' is not defensive registration. the word 'charminar' is not an invented word which is the condition precedent ..... concept or appellation of a class or a genus of goods. in this connection, the court's attention was drawn by mr. ganesh to the definitions relating to certification trade mark,' false trade description', 'trade marks' appearing in section 2. sub-section (1) clauses (c), (f), (g), (i), (m), (u) & (v) and section 2, sub-section (2) clause (b).16. mr. ganesh has contended that ..... schedule of the rules. in our view, the contention of mr. vaidyanathan that in view of change in the language of section 8 of trade marks act as compared to section 5 of trade marks act 1940, registration of trade mark is to be made only in respect of class or genus and not in respect of articles of different species under the genus is based ..... made of india-rubber, then the intention of the act of 1883 and that of 1905 is that there shall be a veto in respect of registering an identical trade mark, or a similar trade mark in respect of goods falling within the description, as distinguished from the class. section 19 is perfectly capable of being read, as is, i think, to be read .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 2008 (SC)

Khoday Distilleries Limited (Now Known as Khoday India Limited) Vs. th ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2008SC2737; 2008(4)AWC3258(SC); 2008(56)BLJR1979; 2008BusLR625(SC); LC2008(2)253; (2008)4MLJ942(SC); 2008(37)PTC413(SC); 2008(9)SCALE40; 2008AIRSCW4560

..... allowing another to invade the rights and spending money on it; (ii) it is a course of conduct inconsistent with the claim for exclusive rights for trade mark, trade name, etc.64. the delay by itself, however, may not be necessarily a ground for refusing to issue injunction. it was opined:106. the ..... 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. white sr. john romilly ..... failed to notice the distinction, which is real and otherwise borne out from the precedents operating in the field. [see - kerly's law of trade marks and trade names, thirteenth edition pg. 600].110. had these tests been applied the matter might have been different. in a given case probably we would ..... act provides for filing of application and application for rectification and, thus, should be considered only from that point of view. registration of a trade mark is governed by the provisions of the act. section 9 thereof provides for restrictions for registration in parts a and b of the register ..... and united sates of america. ian barclay in his affidavit stated:the first applicant received notice of the advertisement of the said mark peter scot in the trade mark journal when it received a routine report from 'wildbore and gibbons dated 20th september, 1974. regrettably, the first applicant did not .....

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!

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!

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!

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!

May 16 2006 (HC)

Astrazeneca Uk Ltd. and anr. Vs. Orchid Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2006(32)PTC733(Del)

..... application has been opposed and the opposition has been decided in favor of the applicant, the registrar shall, unless the central government otherwise directs, register the said trade mark and the trade mark when registered shall be registered as of the date of the making of the said application and that date shall, subject to provisions of section 154, be deemed ..... ., a division bench of bombay high court had declined to interfere with the discretion exercised by the single judge in granting injunction in similar trade marks 'pacitane' which was a registered trade mark and ' parkitane' which was not a registered trade mark. relying on the observation in n.r. dongre v. whirlpool corporation (supra) and printers (mysore) private ltd. v. pothan joseph : ..... 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 purposes, value, geographical origin, the time ..... of the defendant has also chosen a vial the vials shape, however, it is slightly different.6. plaintiffs' trade mark: defendant' trade mark' plaintiff's mark 'meronem'. the defendant's mark is `meromer'19. the defendant has produced a certificate of registration of his trade mark 'meromer' which is dated 1st december, 2005 during the pendency of the case. his plea is that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2002 (HC)

Ramachander Laxminarayan Karva, Registered Partnership Firm, Rep. by I ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2003)1MLJ246

..... . 16. on the basis of the above arguments, the issues arise for consideration in these appeals are:(1)whether the respondents are using the trade marks, offending the registered trade marks of the appellant?(2)whether the registration of the trade mark during the pendency of the appeal can be taken into consideration to mould the relief?(3)to what other relief the parties are entitled ..... not the basis to decide the question of infringement as the same is not the rule of comparison to find out the deceptive resemblance of the offending trade mark. 19. if we compare the trade mark of the appellant with that of the respondents, following the principles of rule of comparison, as laid down by the apex court referred to above, we have no ..... the learned judge had adopted the rule of comparison to find out the degree of dissimilarity and came to the conclusion that there are differences between the trade mark of the appellant and the offending trade mark of the respondents and as such those dissimilarities would enable the purchaser of the commodity to identity the goods of the appellant as well as the respondents ..... the appellant filed c.m.p.11819, 11821 and 11924 of 1997 for amendment of the plaint seeking the appropriate relief of injunction restraining the respondents from using the offending trade marks, apart from the original relief of passing of.5. the appellant is the registered partnership firm, having its factory at hyderabad and is engaged in manufacturing of ammonium chloride .....

Tag this Judgment!


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