Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Page 6 of about 182,041 results (0.114 seconds)

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!

Jul 31 2007 (HC)

S.M.K.A. Enterprises Vs. Suchita Industries

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2008(2)KarLJ285; 2007(6)AIRKarR433; 2008AIHC521(Kar)

..... even though the first two letters are different, the ending two letters are similar in pronunciation. hence, there is likelihood of causing confusion and deception between the two marks because its trade mark, name, logo etc., are deceptively similar. thus keeping in view the chance of this ultimately being-established whether the defendant should be injuncted during the pendency of the ..... importance in view of the judgments cited supra.19. in the instant case, as already noticed the grievance is not with regard to the violation of trade mark itself but using deceptively similar trade mark. in this regard, the plaintiff has referred to several aspects to indicate regarding the popularity of their product, the amounts incurred towards advertisement and the reputation ..... and 2 of the code of civil procedure, 1908. however, insofar as the injunctions being sought for in the case of infringements of a registered trade mark on the contention that the trade mark or description used by the defendant is deceptively similar, an element of common law remedy also creeps into the situation inasmuch as the infringement or violation would ..... in this context, the same requires a deeper analysis.15. as such, considering' that there is a public notice and thereafter one becomes the registered proprietor of the trade mark or trade description, in law, the registration after following the procedure is in itself an injunction in rem against all persons from infringing or copying the same. that being so, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1997 (HC)

M. Mahendra Shah Vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd. and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1997(2)ALT391; 1997(2)ARBLR118(AP)

..... support of their case they contended that if one takes the articles of the defendants which were available for sale and if the plaintiffs also released their product under their trade mark 'marigold' and in the normal course both products were going to be sold through the same sort of outlets, possibly through super markets or through chemists' business or through ..... commodity or food stuff the same was first used. the person who uses the trade mark first becomes the proprietor of such a trade name or trade mark. according to section 33 of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958. even a registered proprietor of the said mark cannot restrain other using the same trade mark prior to him in the market though not registered. in fact, a division bench ..... her contentions to which i will be referring shortly. on the other hand mr. manohar the counsel appearing for hll contended that it was the hll who first used the trade mark 'annapurna' in the market for marketing iodised salt and later they also started marketing atta under the same brand name. because of their extensive advertisement in newspapers and other advertising ..... force till 26-2-1996. hll further contended that the defendant company has a turnover of more then rs. 35 crores and they have already marketed their iodised salt under trade mark 'annapurna' since the year 1992 either by themselves or through their subsidiary companies under the brand name 'annapurna' or 'gold seal annapurna'. since the year 1994 the said brand .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 2009 (HC)

Vizag Profiles Ltd. Vs. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (Rinl), Popularl ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2009(5)ALT58

..... ' as prefix or suffix to their trade mark. before granting a registration certificate, the trade mark registry has published trade mark of the plaintiff in the official trade mark journal bearing no. 1239 supplement dt. 21-1-2001 stating that registration of this trade mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of expression ..... ' 'p' in the circle with dark background is used by the first defendant further strengthens the impression of the general customer that the same trade mark belongs to the plaintiff. though the first defendant contended that it has used the letter 'v' and 'p' in its symbol, it is ..... the following issues were settled for trial:1. whether the plaintiff is entitled for a grant of permanent injunction against the defendants from registering the trade mark 'vizag profiles' with the symbol 'i' and its usage by the first defendant?2. whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for rs. ..... that the steel plant is located at visakhapatnam, which is popularly known as vizag. the word 'vizag steel' is neither a well known trade mark nor a geographical indication. the mere registration of the words 'vizag steel' does not mean that nobody can make use of the word 'vizag ..... arrayed in the trial court.3. the plaintiff filed the suit against defendants 1 and 2 for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from registering the trade mark 'vizag profiles' with symbol 'i' and its usage by the first defendant and for damages of rs. 10,00,000/-.4. according to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 21 1970 (HC)

Pt. Ram Avtar Sharma and ors. Vs. Pt. Chakradhar Saran Sharma and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1971All157

..... 1944 and 1945) but on the date of the passing of the decree respondent no. 1 alone was the proprietor of the two trade marks. as for the trade mark being publici juris, the learned single judge held that gadadhar prasad had the exclusive right to use the word 'himkalyan tail' which was ..... application the name of chakradhar saran was substituted and all the formalities were completed for the publication of the trade marks in the trade mark journal. the registrar has further stated that these two trade marks were thus registered, which registration is effective from the date of the application and has further been renewed ..... the expression 'contrary to any law for the time being in force' in section 8 (c) means any law other than the trade marks act. section 6 of the trade marks act is not covered by the wordings of section 8 (c) of the act. (see ram rakhpal's case supra). 25. ..... the affidavit of kashi nath that sri gadadhar prasad made a deliberate false statement that he was the sole proprietor of the trade marks whereas in fact the said trade marks were the property of the joint hindu family consisting of gadadhar prasad, his sons and grandsons. it has further been alleged ..... hindu family in the joint hindu family business'. admittedly these applications and amendments thereof were filed by gadadhar prasad under section 14 of the trade marks act. the registrar was acquainted with the two statements of facts contained therein. it cannot accordingly be held that the registrar was defrauded .....

Tag this Judgment!


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