Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Page 8 of about 182,041 results (0.163 seconds)

Mar 25 2008 (HC)

Rana Steels Vs. Ran India Steels Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2008(102)DRJ503; LC2008(3)62; 2008(37)PTC24(Del)

..... and services, as far as may be, in accordance with the international classification of goods and services for the purposes of registration of trade marks. rule 22 of the trade marks rules, 2002 provides that for the purposes of registration of trade marks, goods and services shall be classified in the manner specified in the fourth schedule. clearly, registration of trademarks is in relation to specified ..... in connection with which the trademark is registered. there are exceptions which shall be alluded to presently.20. section 29(1) of the trade marks act, 1999, which deals with the issue of infringement of registered trade marks indicates that a trade mark is infringed by a person who, not being a registered proprietor or a person using by way of permitted use, uses in the ..... a prima facie case and also that the balance of convenience lies in its favor, not granting an interim injunction restraining the defendant from further infringing the plaintiff's registered trade mark would result in causing irreparable injury to the plaintiff.29. for all these reasons, even de hors the question of passing off, i am of the view that the ..... not amount to infringement. this is what is specifically provided for under section 30(2)(e).23. but, does section 30(2)(e) also cover cases where identical or similar trade marks are registered in respect of different classes of goods or services? the answer is - no. section 28 deals with the rights conferred by registration. and, it has already been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2008 (HC)

Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited Vs. Cipla Limited

Court : Delhi

Reported in : LC2008(3)384; 2009(39)PTC347(Del)

..... defendant, its directors, assignees, distributors, dealers are, during the pendency of suit restrained from manufacturing, selling or dealing in medicinal preparations under the trade mark theobid-d or any other trade mark as may be deceptively similar with trade mark theobid of the plaintiff. however, in view of prima facie extensive use by defendant since 2007, and so as to enable the defendant to ..... madras high court is different from consistent view of this court.11. i also find that under section 2(1)(w) a registered trade mark is a trade mark which is on the register and is in force. registered trade mark is thus different from registered proprietor. assignment under section 2(b) is an assignment in writing by act of parties concerned. assignment ..... , the same result will follow, besides giving a premium to third parties. in that situation, in the interregnum there will be none to enforce rights in the registered trade mark. 'registered proprietor' in section 28, rather than adopting a pedantic interpretation has to be interpreted as including a person having title as registered proprietor by way of assignment ..... assignment to be complete, the registrar is not involved. it is further borne out from language supra of section 45(1) that the assignee acquires title to registered trade mark on assignment and not by registration. registration is of title acquired by assignment. the inquiry which a registrar is to make before such registration of title acquired by assignment .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2007 (HC)

Pfizer Products Inc. Vs. Rajesh Chopra and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : LC2007(2)323; 2007(35)PTC59(Del)

..... satisfied that there will be no confusion or deception in the market. the authorities should consider requiring such an applicant to submit an official search report from the trade mark office pertaining to the trade mark in question which will enable the drug authority to arrive at a correct conclusion.so far as medicinal products are concerned, the courts have emphasised that an ..... and/or zoloft and/or any other trademark or name similar to the plaintiff's trademarks geodon and/or zoloft either as, a trade mark or part of a trade mark, a trade name or corporate name or as part of a trade or corporate name, or in any other manner whatsoever so as to pass off its goods or business as and for the ..... action is based on invasion of the statutory right. the issues which arise in this action are whether the plaintiff is a proprietor of the trade mark and whether the defendant's mark is identical or similar to trade mark of the plaintiff. in an infringement action the question of deception or confusion will not arise.(v) registration enables the registered proprietor to sue ..... between medicinal products may be life threatening and not merely inconvenient, the court held thus: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, thereforee, be life threatening, not merely inconvenient. nothing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 2009 (HC)

Jaininder JaIn and ors. Vs. Arihant JaIn and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2009(41)PTC492(Del)

..... decisions' and 'decided', in a proposal/counter-proposal.13. an analysis of the family arrangement dated 14.4.1995 would show that besides giving trade mark 'kangaro' and trade name 'kanin' to shri jaininder jain, while giving trade mark 'kenin' and trade name 'kangaro' to shri arihant jain and shri vishwa jain after 31.3.96, the parties also decided, presumably with a view to avoid ..... by learned counsel for the respondents that the appellants did not set up the family settlement dated 14.4.1995 before the registrar of trade mark while applying to record changes in the register of trade mark, in respect of the trade mark 'kennin' under registration no. 486510, and in fact relied upon the retirement deed dated 31.3.1995 for this purpose. in our ..... registration under section 17(1b) of registration act, that would not come in the way of giving effect to that part of the document which deals with granting ownership of trade mark 'kangaro' to shri jaininder jain and therefore does not require compulsory registration. section 49 of the registration act prescribes effect of non-registration documents which are compulsorily registrable. it ..... of the trademark 'kangaro', though turnover of the respondents is stated to be much brighter than that of the appellants, (v) in some countries the appellants are using this trade mark while in some other countries it is being used by the respondents; (vi) the court can take a final view on the nature, admissibility and applicability of the documents termed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2007 (HC)

Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Ltd. Vs. Atlas Products Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 146(2008)DLT274; LC2007(3)57; 2008(36)PTC269(Del)

..... acquiescence is sitting by, 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. it implies positive acts; not merely silence or inaction such as is involved in laches'. this passage delineates the watershed between the legal concepts of delay and of acquiescence ..... of six months from the date of communication of this order.after review132. we, in view of our findings aforementioned, direct:(i) the respondents be restrained from using the trade mark including the trade name 'ramdev masala' in any of their products.(ii) they may, however, carry on their business in any other name insofar as manufacturing of spices is concerned and in ..... in the context of the memorandum of understanding, their lordships directed that -original134. we, in view of our findings aforementioned, direct:(i) the respondents be restrained from using the trade mark including the trade name 'ramdev masala' in any of their products.(ii) they may, however, carry on their business in any other name insofar as manufacturing of spices is concerned.(iii) the ..... rs. 50 lakhs before the trial court or furnish a bank guarantee for the said sum by way of security.(v) despite pending applications for rectification before the registrar of trade marks, the final hearing of civil suit no. 828 of 2000 shall be expedited and the learned trial judge is hereby directed to complete the hearing as expeditiously as possible .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2009 (HC)

Pioneer Nuts and Bolts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Goodwill Enterprises

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 169(2009)DLT209; 2009(41)PTC362(Del)

..... a continuous user by him.'18. in amaravathi enterprises v. karaikudi chettinadu : 2008 (36) ptc 688 (madras)(db), it was observed that apart from prior continuous use of the trade mark and trade name, the defendant seeking to set up a defence of prior use under section 34 of the tm act had to also prove the volume of sales. in veerumal praveen ..... the us embassy and us aid office, new delhi. it was in those circumstances that reliance was placed on the advertisements in the country for dissemination of knowledge about the trade mark. therefore, the said case was not about mere advertisements but advertisements coupled with the availability of goods even outside india. the whole case proceeded upon the extra territorial reputation of ..... . v. the british pure oil grease and carbide co. ltd. (1934) 51 rpc 157, a distinction was drawn between the standard of proof of continuous prior user of an unregistered trade mark as required in an infringement action and that required in a rectification proceeding. the standard requited to defeat an infringement action was more stringent and rigorous. it was observed that ..... of 1996, sales and income tax returns from 1996 onwards and excise registration certificate.11. the learned single judge noted that injunction should ordinarily follow the infringement of a registered trade mark, subject to two exceptions contained in the tm act. the first exception being section 28 which was to the effect that if both the plaintiff and the defendant are owners .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1960 (HC)

Durga Dutt Sarma Vs. Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1962Ker156

..... sharma bona fide using it. 10. another consequence of the word not having lost its original meaning is that the register of the trade marks under the trade marks act, 1940 has to be corrected, so far as the word navaratna is concerned, except in the combination, which we propose to ..... other preparations. it is admitted in the case that the firm later had registered 'navaratna' and 'navaratna pharmceutical laboratories', as its two trade marks under the cochin trade marks act, act xix of 11119. the relevant documents are exts. j(1) and j (2) and both are of the year ..... likelihood of a person being deceived. in this connection, we may refer to the following passage from kerly on trade marks seventh edition, pp. 615, 616: ''a trade mark is likely to deceive or cause confusion by its resemblance to another already on the register if it is likely to ..... and 'navaratna pharmaceutical laboratories' later, so as to distinguish his business from those of other' the learned judge has next held that the aforesaid trade mark, 'navaratna pharmaceutical laboratories' has teen infringed by the use of the words 'navaratna kalpa pharmacy', and not by the words 'navaratna kalpa', that ..... attributes. the next group of the conclusions in the judgment is that the registration of 'navaratna' and 'navaratna pharmaceutical laboratories' under the trade marks act and the renewals constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the registration; that pandit sharma should establish their invalidity; and that as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 2008 (HC)

Lark Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Nabros Pharma Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2009)2GLR1376; 2010(41)PTC675(Guj)

..... business or personally works for gain. under the circumstances as the plaintiff company carries on business at ahmedabad, suit filed by the said company for infringement of registered trade-mark 'dolaren' and also for infringement of copyright, civil court at ahmedabad would have territorial jurisdiction. relying upon the decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the ..... therefore, the learned chamber judge has committed an error in granting injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. it is submitted that considering provisions of trade mark act, 1999 more particularly section 134 of the said act, for passing off action, the civil court, ahmedabad would not have any territorial jurisdiction as admittedly the defendant ..... in any manner, whatsoever with the business of the plaintiff, his agents, servants, distributors and retailers from manufacturing, marketing, selling and advertising their goods by using impugned trade-mark boleran along with the copyright in the artwork of its label and on packages.(e) the defendant be ordered to produce accounts for the sale of boleran along with ..... in the business of manufacturing, marketing, selling and exporting medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations and the defendant is also manufacturing, selling and exporting an identical product under deceptive similar trade-mark 'bolaren' and copyright consisting the artistic work in its label, packages etc. which is an identical or rather ditto-to-ditto same as that of the plaintiff's .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 27 1990 (HC)

Amrutanjan Limited Vs. AshwIn Fine Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals, Kash ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1991Mad277

..... trial, and not at the present; stage.10. it is more important to note that the defendants have not disputed the factum of registration of the plaintiffs' trade-mark 'amrutanjan' in the trade-mark registry at madras, long back and that the plaintiffs have been manufacturing the said product from madras and marketing the same in various parts of the country for ..... the jurisdiction of this court.4. in paragraph 4 of the plaint it has been averred that the plaintiffs have duly registered their aforesaid trade mark' amrutanj an' under the trade marks act, 1940, corresponding to the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 as evidenced by document no. 1 filed along with the plaint, which registration is being renewed from time to time, their ..... which each of the office of the registry shall exercise its functions are also defined, even though the original registration was done at a different place for the plaintiffs' trade mark, since madras happens to be one of its branches having independent territorial jurisdiction regarding the powers conferred under the act and there cannot be any doubt that the plaintiffs' ..... suit. the defendants plead further in paragraph 7 of the written statement that in or about the year 1977, the defendants bona fide,, and honestly adopted a trade-mark label, 'ashw1ns' from their trading style, 'ashwin fine chemicals and pharmaceuti-cals' and have been using the same continuously, voluminously and extensively in the state of maharashtra, and that since the defendants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1968 (HC)

B.S. Ramappa and anr. Vs. V.B. Monappa and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1970Mad156

..... he filed an application, o.p. no. 65 of 1954 in this court under section 46 of the trade marks act of 1940 for rectification of the register of trade marks by the removal of the trade mark (no. 126612) which had been registered with effect from 1946 in the name of b. s. ramappa, ..... celebrated '4711 eau-de-cologne,' rueter co., ltd. was a company in england and it claimed to have been rightly registered as proprietors of the trade mark '4711' in england, and brought the action against the defendant for some reliefs based on that allegation. before the outbreak of the ii world war ..... use, in relation to the same goods or description of goods, of trade marks nearly resembling each other or of identical trade marks, if, having regard to the similarity of the goods and of the trade marks, the use of the trade marks in exercise ot those rights would be likely to deceive or cause confusion.' ..... . where, as here, another party in the same way of business had already put forward a claim to be the proprietor or the identical trade mark and had withdrawn the application for registration merely to avoid controversy and expense, it seems to be impossible to hold that the party who had ..... the claimant to make out that he is the proprietor, because the section speaks of the registrar permitting registration by more than one proprietor of trade marks which are identical or nearly resemble each other in the case of honest, concurrent use or other special circumstances.section 18 under which the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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