Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Sorted by: recent Page 1 of about 184,057 results (0.169 seconds)

Mar 15 2019 (SC)

Kaikhosrou(chick) Kavasji Framji and Anr Vs. Union of India and Anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... . the case at hand was regarded as an appropriate case for entertaining the writ petition [see siemens ltd. vs. state of maharashtra 2006 (12) scc33and whirlpool corporation vs. registrar of trade marks (1998) 8 scc1.81. before parting, we consider it apposite to mention that we have set out the facts of the case 42 only for the purpose of appreciating and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2019 (SC)

Tamil Nadu Polution Control Board Vs. Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. .

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... an action in the nature of passing off against the defendants in the high court of mysore, stating that they are exclusive owners of a particular trade mark. this court found that exercise of jurisdiction by the high court of mysore is governed by mysore act 5 of 1962. holding that the said high ..... in respect of which by special acts it has been specifically invested with jurisdiction. the high court is competent jurisdiction under section 105 of the trade and merchandise marks act to exercise original 48 43 of 1958 if it is invested with the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of a district court, and not otherwise, ..... to establish any industry, operation or process, or any treatment and disposal system or any extension or addition thereto, which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into a stream or well or sewer or on land (such discharge being hereafter in this section referred to as discharge of sewage); or (b) ..... reason of any reduction of the temperature or volume or rate of discharge of the effluent as compared with the previous discharge. trade effluent. where 26. provision regarding existing discharge of sewage or immediately before the commencement of this act any person was discharging any sewage or ..... trade effluent into a stream or well or sewer or on land, the provisions of section 25 shall, so far as may be, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 2019 (SC)

Delhi Dayal Bagh House Building Society Vs. Regitrar, Co-Operative Soc ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... of statutory appeal against the order impugned dated 2nd july, 2013 under the act 2003 taking note of the view expressed by this court in whirlpool corporation vs. registrar of trade marks, mumbai and others 1998(8) scc1 we are not inclined to entertain the appeal with liberty to the appellant to avail the statutory remedy of appeal available to him under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 2019 (SC)

Monsanto Technology Llc Thru the Authorised Representative Ms. Natalia ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... application for injunction under order 39, rule 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure (hereinafter referred to as the code ), to restrain the defendants from using their registered trade mark in violation of the registered patent during the pendency of the suit in view of the termination of the agreement.4. the defendants in their written statement inter alia contended ..... in question, the provisions of the act, the ppvfr act and a large volume of case laws for construction of patents, the obligations under the world trade organisation (wto), general agreement on tariffs and 19 trade (gatt), trade related aspects of intellectual property rights (trips) agreement, leading to the patents amendment act, 2002 on 25.06.2002, in view of nature of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2018 (SC)

b.k Educational Services Pvt Ltd Vs. Parag Gupta and Associates

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... when such jurisdiction is exercised by a single judge, his judgment becomes subject to appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent there being nothing to the contrary in the trade marks act. (at 1033-1034) 11. given the fact that the procedure that would apply to the nclt would be the procedure contained inter alia in the limitation act, it is ..... the present case, the principle enunciated therein is one of general application and has an apposite application to the facts and circumstances of the present case. section 76 of the trade marks act confers a right of appeal to the high court and says 20 nothing more about it. that being so, the high court being seized as such of the appellate ..... this court stating: the trade marks act does not provide or lay down any procedure for the future conduct or career of that appeal in the high court, indeed section 77 of the act provides that ..... . ltd. v. james chadwick and bros. ltd., 1953 scr1028 this court dealt with an appeal to the high court from any decision of the registrar under section 76 of the trade marks act. it was argued that the provisions of clause 15 of the letters patent would not be attracted to such an appeal preferred under section 76. this was negatived by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 2018 (SC)

Wockhardt Limited Vs. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... by the court would shape depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. where a defendant has imitated or adopted the plaintiff s distinctive trade mark or business name, the order may be an absolute injunction that he would not use or carry on business under that name. (kerly, ibid ..... is similarity. there is no explanation at all for torrent s past conduct and the inaction with knowledge, or deemed knowledge, of wockhardt s trade mark registration application, its advertisement and subsequent registration, with not a single objection from torrent or is predecessor-in-title. there is no answer about ..... , the arguments were confined to passing off only. 13) the skeletal facts necessary to decide this appeal are that the plaintiff/respondent has a trade mark called chymoral and chymoral forte , which is a drug administered post-surgically for swellings that may arise and/or wounds that may arise. it ..... . seeing the sales figures of chymowok from december, 2017 till august, 2018 and the fact that the appellant s sales under the new trade name are substantial, we do not think that we should exercise our discretionary jurisdiction under article 136 of the constitution of india in favour of ..... , which, in turn, had obtained the said mark from one armour pharmaceutical company. the user that is claimed on behalf of the plaintiff is at least from the year 1988 as and when elder pharmaceuticals ltd. actually sold drugs under the two trade names as aforesaid. the division bench also referred .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 30 2018 (SC)

Diyora and Bhanderi Corporation Vs. Sarine Technologies Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... ) nos.17685-86 of 2018) diyora and bhanderi corporation through its partner and ors. appellants versus sarine technologies ltd. .. . respondent judgment uday umesh lalit, j.1. 2. leave granted. commercial trade mark suit no.8 of 2017 was filed by the respondent herein ( plaintiff , for short) in the court of district judge, surat contending inter alia that it had validly subsisting copyright ..... of the above and for the reasons stated above, present appeal from order succeeds. impugned order passed below exh.5 application by the learned judge, commercial court, vadodara in commercial trade mark suit no.8/2017 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned judge, commercial court, vadodara for deciding the application exh.5 afresh in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2018 (SC)

M/S. Nandhini Deluxe Vs. M/S. Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Fed ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... the rules. in our view, 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 under the genus is ..... for registration and the goods in respect of which the appellant intended to claim registration. this was submitted in the tabulated form as under: class goods applied in the trade mark application class 29 trade mark app. no.982285 meat, fish, poultry and game; meat extracts; preserved, dried and cooked fruits and vegetables; jellies, jams, fruit sauces; eggs; milk and milk products; ..... number of persons involved in the channels of distribution of the goods or services; (iii) the business circles dealing with the goods or services, to which that trade mark applies. (8) where a trade mark has been determined to be well-known in at least one relevant section of the public in india by any court or registrar, the registrar shall consider that ..... is raised in opposition proceedings by the proprietor of the earlier trade mark. (6) the registrar shall, while determining whether a trade mark is a well-known trade mark, take into account any fact which he considers relevant for determining a trade mark as a well-known trade mark including (i) the knowledge or recognition of that trade mark in the relevant section of the public including knowledge in india .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 12 2018 (SC)

Parakh Vanijya Private Limited Vs. Baroma Agro Product

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... rice, coffee, tea etc. in the registration under class-30, there is a disclaimer for the word malabar . the disclaimer is worded thus:- condition & limitation: registration of this trade mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of word malabar and all other descriptive matters 7. the appellant though claims exclusive right over the word malabar since there is ..... of the respondent s then mark and other materials, the learned single judge vide order dated 02.07.2012 granted ..... plaintiff claims to have been using the mark malabar for selling biryani rice from 2001. the appellant filed the suit cs no.27 of 2012 for infringement and passing off special biryani rice under the mark malabar gold or other mark/trade name which is identical with and/or deceptively similar to the appellant s trade mark malabar . on consideration of various features ..... interim injunction observing that there was similarity between the two labels/marks and restrained the respondents/defendants from using the label mark malabar . the division bench declined .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 2018 (SC)

Kalpana Mehta and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... 7 scc243100 (2015) 16 scc795109 any symbol relating to gods, goddesses or places of worship should not ordinarily be registered as a trade mark.133. the petitioners have also referred to other cases such as gujarat electricity board v. hind mazdoor sabha and others101, modern dental college and research centre and others v. ..... stage standards.132. in lal babu priyadarshi v. amritpal singh 100 , while dealing with a trade mark case under various sections of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 [repealed by the trade marks act, 1999 (47 of 1999), this court referred to the eighth report on the trade marks bill, 1993 submitted by the parliamentary standing committee which was of the opinion that 99 (2017) ..... committee liable in a civil or criminal action for what is stated in parliament. such is not the position here. mr gonsalves submitted that in significant respects, our constitution marks a historical break from the english parliamentary tradition. india has adopted the doctrine of constitutional supremacy and not 9 part b parliamentary sovereignty, as in the uk. hence, cases ..... in k.c. gajapati narayan deo (supra) to the effect that if the constitution distributes the legislative powers amongst different bodies which have to act within their respective spheres marked out by specific legislative entries or if there are limitations on the legislature in the form of fundamental rights, the question will arise as to whether, in a particular case .....

Tag this Judgment!


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