Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Page 6 of about 192,848 results (0.158 seconds)

Feb 10 2003 (HC)

Pidilite Industries Ltd. Vs. S.M. Associates and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2003(5)BomCR295; 2004(28)PTC193(Bom)

..... herein which commenced business only in 1998.39. the next question is whether the first defendant has infringed the plaintiffs registered trade mark. the plaintiffs registered trade mark consists of the mark 'm-seal' with a disclaimer of the word 'seal'. the trade mark was registered on 16.8.1972. the registration is valid till 16th august, 2007 as is clear from the certificate produced ..... first defendant has infringed the plaintiffs copyright in respect thereof.65. dr. shivade submitted that the plaintiff had expressly or impliedly consented to the first defendant using to the said trade mark. he founded this defence on section 30(b) of the act which reads as under :30.'acts not constituting infringement - (1)notwithstanding anything contained in this act, the ..... fact that the deed of assignment in the facts of this case would require to be considered keeping in mind the surrounding circumstances, including the deed of assignment of the trade mark.13. dr. tulzapurkar also challenged dr. shivades interpretation of the deed of assignment of copyright.14. it is necessary firstly to ascertain the copyright works claimed by the ..... as a director of kliptronic components pvt. ltd.3. the association of motiwala with the plaintiffs predecessors was thus substantial, indicating his knowledge of and familiarity with the said trade mark and copyright.4.on 1st september, 1992, a partnership firm electro components manufacturing co., was formed of which k.e. motiwala was a partner. he resigned as a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 1961 (HC)

Nekumar K. Porwal Vs. Mohanlal Hargovindas

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1963Bom246; (1962)64BOMLR616

..... an application for rectification of the register. they, however, do indicate the circumstances in which the court suo motu would order expungemet of an entry from the register of trade marks namely, where a trade mark, as already stated, was incapable, in its very nature, of registration under the act, or where the registration has been illegal or improper. in no other case would ..... not eventually be found to be such person, e.g. by his conduct, as in this case, in withdrawing his opposition to the application for registration of a trade mark and thereby allowing the trade mark to be registered without any objection from him. reference in this connection may be made to in the matter of actomin products ltd. (1952) 69 r.p.c ..... the said act and then proceeded to observe as follows :'broadly, the case of the appellants is that the trade mark 'cibol' so closely resembles their trade mark 'ciha' and that their trade mark 'ciba' was already on the register on august 24, 1946, and therefore, the trade mark of the respondents, should not have been registered on november 3, 1949. the appellants had also sought to bring ..... . birmingham vinegar brewery co., (1894) ac 8. it is as follows :'wherever it can be shown, as here, that the applicant is in the. same trade as the person who has registered 'the trade mark, and wherever the trade mark if remaining on the register, would or might limit the legal rights of the applicant, so that by reason of the existence of the entry .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2008 (HC)

Wyeth Holdings Corporation and anr. Vs. Burnet Pharmaceuticals (Pvt.) ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2008Bom100; 2008(2)ALLMR405; 2008(2)BomCR739; (2008)110BOMLR409; LC2008(1)275; 2008(36)PTC478(Bom)

..... defendant a valid defence in an action for infringement and passing off. the decided cases furnish other instances. among them is a judgment of the delhi high court where a trade mark of a medicinal preparation (nimulid) is wholly derived from the principal drug used in its manufacture (nimesulide). (panacea biotec ltd. v. recon ltd. : air1997delhi244 . griffon laboratories (p) ..... matters of infringement and passing off involving pharmaceutical products in cadila: at paragraph 32 page 1964public interest would support lesser degree of proof showing confusing similarity in the case of trade mark in respect of medicinal product as against other nonmedicinal product. drugs are poisons, not sweets. confusion between medical products may, therefore, be life threatening, not merely inconvenient. ..... appellate judges based themselves in arriving at the conclusion that there was no reasonable apprehension of confusion or deception was, as we have earlier stated, that there were various trade marks with a prefix or suffix 'gluco'or 'vita'and that made it impossible to say that the common features 'glu' and 'vita' were only associated with the ..... are meant for curing the same ailment but the compositions are different;(iii) there is no phonetic or structural similarity between the two marks. under section 30(2)(a) of the trade mark act, 1999, a registered trade mark is not infringed where the use in relation to goods or services indicates inter alia the kind, quality, intended purpose or other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 2009 (HC)

The Atul Products Limited Vs. V.P. Mehta (Since Deceased Through His L ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2009Bom84; 2009(111)BomLR796; LC2009(1)237; 2009(40)PTC91(Bom)

..... fide description of the character or quality of his goods.therefore, the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant has used the plaintiff's trade mark or word mark 'atul' dishonestly and malafide. the dishonest and malafide use by a trader dealing in the said goods would only be shown if the ..... 2 and class- 5 of schedule- iv of the act. it is the plaintiff's case that it commenced its use of the said trade mark and word mark since 1955. the averment in that regard is made in paragraph 7 of the plaint. the defendant has not admitted the said averment in ..... and atul chemical industries ltd. in the district court, surat and the city civil court, ahmedabad. the plaintiff was, therefore, desirous of protecting its trade mark even against others. by virtue of the common name 'atul', the plaintiff has met with such confrontation more than once. the plaintiff must, therefore, ..... between the parties.11. it is the case of the plaintiff that certain other parties had also tried to infringe the plaintiff's registered trade mark and hence the plaintiff has instituted legal proceedings in ahmedabad city civil court and surat district court being 2 suits filed therein and an appeal ..... its officers. the defendant has examined himself.10. the plaintiff has essentially relied upon the applications made to the trade marks registry for the issue of the trade mark as well as the word mark 'atul', the affidavits filed by the officer of the plaintiff on behalf of the plaintiff and the registration certificates .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 2006 (HC)

Shaw Wallace and Company Ltd. and anr. Vs. Mohan Rocky Spring Water Br ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2006(3)ALLMR439; 2006(3)BomCR252; 2006(4)MhLj396; LC2007(2)185; 2006(33)PTC180(Bom)

..... denied to the plaintiffs, because the plaintiffs have made an incorrect statement in the plaint. but as the purpose of granting temporary injunction in a suit for infringement of trade-mark or trade label is not only to protect the interest of the plaintiffs, but also to protect the interest of the general public, in my opinion, denial of temporary injunction ..... agreement dt.19-4-2002 referred to above are relevant and by reason thereof, the defendants are estopped from disputing the validity or popularity or reputation of the plaintiffs' mark. 6. the trade marks, brand names and the get up in which the beer will be sold, supplied and delivered by mrsbl (defendants) to swbl (plaintiffs) or as per direction of ..... ) reputation, which the plaintiffs have established for the reasons stated above (ii) misrepresentation, which is established by the plaintiffs by reason of the identical essential feature of the plaintiffs' trade mark being used by the defendants and (iii) damage, which is established by the plaintiffs by reason of the confusion created by the defendants. the plaintiffs are, therefore, entitled to ..... filed a statement showing their annual sales from 1993-94. the plaintiffs state that they have made efforts to popularise their beer sold under the said trade mark and have issued sale material bearing the trade mark 'haywards 5000'. they have spent substantial sums of moneys on publicity and sales promotional expenses. they have filed a chart showing the expenditure incurred by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2007 (HC)

Raymond Limited Vs. Raymond Pharmaceuticals Private Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)109BOMLR521; 2007(4)MhLj243; LC2007(2)67; 2007(35)PTC334(Bom)

..... in industrial or commercial matters; or(b) is detrimental to its distinctive character; or(c) is against the reputation of the trade mark.(9) where the distinctive elements of a registered trade mark consist of or include words, the trade mark may be infringed by the spoken use of those words as well as by their visual representation and reference in this section ..... of the plaintiff.7. in the first place, it is necessary to examine whether the word 'raymond' is common and therefore available for adoption without reference to the plaintiff's trade mark. the reader's digest great encyclopaedic dictionary describes the word 'raymond' as under:raymond (masc.). ultimately from gmc raginmund, 'mighty protection'.' the defendants have also submitted a ..... act, 1957 for the word 'raymond' written in stylized manner. in short, for the goods in question, which are broadly wearing apparel, plaintiffs have registered copyright and registered trade mark for the word 'raymond'.4. the defendant is a company called 'raymond pharmaceuticals limited' and has nothing to do with wearing apparels. it uses the word 'raymond' as ..... 1925, which had conceived and adopted the use of word 'raymond' in a stylized manner for marketing its product.3. on 27th june, 1983, the plaintiff obtained registration for the trade mark 'raymond' under registration no. 401766 registered in class 25 in respect of textile piece goods including shirting, suiting and saris, dress materials, blankets, shawls, satin, bed and table .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2003 (HC)

The Court Receiver, High Court, as Receiver of the Business and Assets ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2003(3)ALLMR873; 2003(5)BomCR501; 2003(27)PTC555(Bom); [2003]45SCL335(Bom)

..... court passed the order dated 30.11.2001 directing the receiver to engage an advocate to initiate proceedings in respect of the infringement of the trade mark 'postman', the defendant no. 1 started using the trade mark 'postiano'. the trade marks having been found to be deceptively similar, it is clear that this is an obvious attempt to circumvent the orders of this court and i ..... that it is not possible to seel it because of a complete devaluation. in the context of passing-off, goodwill has been described by kerly in the law of trade of trade marks and trade names, thirteenth edition, as something which represents 'in connection with any business or business product, the value of the attraction to customers which the name and reputation possesses. it ..... 'registered proprietor' as follows:-'(q) 'registered proprietor', in relation to a trade mark, means the persons for the time being entered in the register as proprietor of the trade mark.'clause (b) of section 2 defines 'associated trade marks' as follows:'(b) 'associated trade marks' means trade marks deemed to be, or required to be registered as associated trade marks under this act.'5. dr. tulzapurkar, learned counsel for the defendant no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 2007 (HC)

Balkrishna Hatcheries Vs. Nandos International Ltd. and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2007(4)BomCR48; (2007)109BOMLR911; LC2007(2)201; 2007(35)PTC295(Bom)

..... in part b and in respect of processed or frozen meat products falling in class 29 of schedule iv to the trade marks rules 2002 ('the first trade mark'). the first trade mark was registered on 4th july 1989; (b) a second trade mark was subsequently adopted by the plaintiff in 2005 consisting of the word nandus enclosed within an oval shaped structure in white ..... using in relation to any eatable goods or restaurant or hotelling services or processed and frozen chicken and meat products the impugned trade-mark 'nandos' or any other deceptively similar trade-mark so as to infringe the plaintiffs registered trade-mark 'nandu'. a perpetual injunction on the same terms in relation to passing off is also claimed. by this notice of motion ..... goods may be considered similar to services the guiding principles and factors that are relevant in considering whether there is similarity between goods/services are as follows:(i)the english trade marks act, 1938 contained a phrase 'goods of the same description' which was relevant in deciding application for registration. there is a line of authorities that explain this ..... kebabs, chicken nuggets, fried chicken, boneless chicken, chicken legs and other varieties of chicken products as well as meat pies , meat tenderizers;(iii) it adopted the first trade mark in respect of the said business.(iv) it has been extensively widening its product line and services by introduction of other food related products namely curries, biryanis, including vegetarian .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2006 (HC)

H.M. Saraiya ors. Vs. Ajanta India Ltd. and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2006(33)PTC4(Bom)

..... , the contention of mr. vaidyanathan that in view of change in the language of section 8 of the trade marks act as compared to section 5 of the 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 ..... law has further developed and the principle of common field of activity and the allied product has been expanded. in the kerly's law of trade marks and trade names, 14th edition 2005, the learned author has stated as under:there is no rule that the defendant must operate in the same field ..... that the principles in respect of cognate goods and allied products as laid down by the well known writer kerly in kerley's law of trade marks and trade names 12th edition must be restated. the learned author has dealt with the case of the same description or associated goods in vol. 10 ..... , particularly paras, 40 and 43 of the said judgment read as under:40. mr. daruwalla also relied upon the passage from kerry's law of trade marks and trade names, 12th edition, paras 10-12 which is as under:the test to be applied:the test whether or not goods or services are 'of the ..... conscience. conditions peculiar to this country may however necessitate acceptance of the english law with certain modifications. in england there is now the trade marks act of 1905, under which trade-marks are registered for specified classes of goods. though the provisions of that enactment are based on decisions given before the act was passed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2007 (HC)

McDonald's Corporation repr. by Its Attorney Ms. Shiela M. Lehr and Mc ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2007KAR3346; 2007(5)KarLJ638; LC2007(3)153; 2008(37)PTC247(Karn)

..... india since october 1996, as is evident from paragraph 7 of memorandum of appeal. this being the admitted facts, plaintiffs cannot claim exclusive right on the defendants trade mark. since defendant has been using its trade mark since 1983, plaintiffs cannot have any grievance against it. the suit filed by the plaintiffs is imaginary and vexatious. the trial court is justified in dismissing ..... in such circumstances is not allowed, the trader or manufacturer by virtue of earlier registration will be permitted to enjoy the mischief of trafficking in trade mark....therefore the plaintiffs cannot claim exclusive right to trade with their trade mark 'mac'.15. it is also pertinent to note that the admitted position is, plaintiffs grievance is only against using the word mac by the ..... it is also not disputed that the expression 'charminar' is not an inventive word which is the condition precedent for defensive registration under section 47 of the trade marks act (section 38 of the trade marks act of 1940). no evidence has been led by the respondent company that the respondent company had really intended or even now intends to manufacture any other ..... ) 43, 1999 ptc (19) 334, air 1990 delhi 19, 2004 (28) otc 121 (sc), 56 (1994) dlt 102, in support of the contention regarding infringement of trade mark. he contended that prior registration of trade mark confers exclusive right upon the plaintiffs and the same has to be protected under section 33 of the act. he also contended that the name of a .....

Tag this Judgment!


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