Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: trade marks Year: 1959 Page 1 of about 795 results (0.102 seconds)

Jan 13 1959 (HC)

Purshottam K. Patel Vs. Bastiram Narandas

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-13-1959

Reported in : AIR1961Bom119; (1960)62BOMLR841

..... a person seeks to register is not likely to deceive or cause confusion is upon the applicant. it is for him to satisfy the registrar or the court that his trade mark does not fall within the prohibition of section 8 or 10 of the act and therefore the same should be registered. now as i have already pointed out on a ..... of justice by reason of its being likely to deceive and cause confusion. in the circumstances the opponents under the provisions of sections 8(a) and 10(1) of the trade marks act submitted that the petitioner's application for registration should not be granted.3. affidavits were filed on behalf of both the sides thereafter in support of their contentions before ..... to deceive or cause contusion was disentitled to protection in a court of justice as mentioned in section 8(a) of the act; 2. whether the petitioner's mark so nearly resembled the registered trade mark of the opponents as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion within the meaning of section 10(1) of the act; and 3. whether in the ..... that the sale deed executed by duba chaudhari in favour of the petitioner specifically mentions that 'the bidi workshop of the bidis of the above label (mark) is closed. the goods bearing the said label (trade mark) are not current in the market'. i cannot understand how having made that statement in the deed of sale dated 9-4-1954 duba chaudhari was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 1959 (HC)

D. Adinarayana Setty Vs. Brooke Bond Tea of India Ltd.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-14-1959

Reported in : AIR1960Kant142; AIR1960Mys142

..... there can be little doubt that an attempt to create a similar impression by adopting the same device of a lady carrying a child in another trade mark is calculated to confuse or deceive. the learned counsel for the appellant, however, has emphasized that there may bee itself be a deciding factor ..... of 1952-53 is against the order dated 8-4-1952 of the ex-officio deputy registrar of trade marks, bangalore, refusing to register the trade mark of the appellant. both these appeals are by d. adinarayana setty, trading under the name and style of 'good luck tea co.' in akkipet, bangalore city. the subject ..... which the document relates. the former, viz., the agency agreement, does not refer to any trade mark at all. although the partition deed refers to a trade mark, there is no way of discovering what the mark which was dealt with at that partition was. regarding the extent of the turnover, there is no ..... their opposition at bangalore, they did not amend their opposition by invoking the provisions of sub-section(1) of s. 10 of the trade marks act. nevertheless the registrar on his own, and as he was entitled and bound to, considered the case of the appellant for registration ..... the respondents' application for registration was pending before the registrar at bombay. the respondents but continued to use his mark and himself applied for registration under the provisions of the mysore trade marks act of 1944 on 30-6-1947. the appellant did not enter any opposition against the claim for registration .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1959 (SC)

Corn Products Refining Co. Vs. Shangrila Food Products Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-08-1959

Reported in : AIR1960SC142; (1960)62BOMLR162; [1960]1SCR968

..... that the commodities concerned in the present case are so connected as to make confusion or deception likely in view of the similarity of the two trade marks. we think that the decision of desai, j., was right. 24. in the result, we set aside the order of the learned appellate ..... the registrations merely consisted of one and the same word registered separately in respect of several articles to be found in a single class of the trade marks schedules, the registrar would in general regard all these registrations as but the equivalent of a single registration covering all the items, for they would ..... 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 ..... to be deceived or confused. one of the findings made by the deputy registrar was that the appellant had acquired a reputation and goodwill for its trade mark 'glucovita' in respect of glucose powder mixed with vitamins. 6. the appellant then preferred an appeal to the high court at bombay from the ..... ), a substance used as food or as an ingredient in food; glucose for food.' on the same date the appellant had also registered the same trade mark in class 5 in respect of 'infants' and invalids' foods.' 4. the appellant opposed the respondent's application contending that it should be refused .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1959 (HC)

Abdulla Khan Vs. B. MiskIn Saheb and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-24-1959

Reported in : AIR1960AP149

..... in the text book 'law of trade marks and trade names' by kerly, may be usefully extracted, hereunder;'two important questions are suggested by the sections concerned with deceptive resemblance : a. who are the ..... case of purchasers who are literate. if it was not the object of the defendants to make a design similar to that of the registered trade mark of the plaintiff, there are many ways open to the defendants to have prevented possible mistakes by either increasing the size of their own emblem ..... the retail dealers buying goods for resale would not be deceived, since they might themselves fraudulently or carelessly make use of the ambiguous character of the trade mark to deceive their customers the ultimate purchasers. in fact, dealers who buy from the manufacturers in order to sell by retail are often aware of ..... in telugu words '' (fighting beedi'). also the elephant is facing to the leftwards in the design. as correctly pointed out in kerly's law of trade marks at page 616, the issue is not to be determined by a comparison of the emblems in dispute. the relevant passage at pages 616 to 618 ..... to do. the design of an animal which design has no particular significance would not really be regarded as covered by the registration of the trade mark as excluding similar other animals being used by others. nobody can claim a soecial prerogative to make use of the design of an animal in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1959 (HC)

T.i. Muhammad Zumoon Sahib Vs. Fathimunnissa Alias Bibijan and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-21-1959

Reported in : AIR1960Mad80

..... . the suit was for an injunction to restrain the defendant from infringing a registered trade mark. admittedly one muhomed yoonus sahib was the person in whose name the said trade mark was duly registered with the registrar of trade marks, bombay, the trade mark being " 708 yoonus beedi" yoonus died on 8-5-1953 and it is ..... the title already exists in the legal representative and on proof of such title to his satisfaction, the registrar registers him as the proprietor of the trade mark.(4) in any event the entire discussion is academic, because before the judgment was delivered in the case the plaintiffs field into court an order ..... persons on whom the right has devolved would be entitled to the same right which the original registered proprietor has for the use of the registered trade mark. it is true that s. 35 prescribes a procedure for the assignee or the representative to have registration of his title. the fallacy in ..... of the trial, however, they did obtain an order of the register on 7-8-1954, recognising the title of the plaintiffs to the trade mark. with leave of the court the order of the registrar was received in evidence and at their request the defendant was given leave to file ..... , and the registrar shall on receipt of the application and on proof of title to his satisfaction, register him as the proprietor of the trade mark in respect of the goods in respect of which the assignment or transmission has effect, and shall cause particulars of the assignment or transmission to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1959 (HC)

Chunulal Seetaram Vs. G.S. Muthiah and Brothers and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-17-1959

Reported in : AIR1959Mad359

1. both these appeals have been filed under section 76 of the trade marks act against decisions of the registrar regarding rectification of the trade marks register. under section 76(1)"save as otherwise expressly provided in the act, an appeal shall lie from any decision of the registrar under the act or the rules made thereunder to the high court having jurisdiction." the office of the registrar of trade marks is situated in bombay. the register of trade marks is kept at bombay and the rectification is made in that register. ' it must, therefore, be held that the high court having jurisdiction in the matter is the high court at bombay. there is ample authority to support this conclusion in the decisions in abdul ghani v. registrar of trade marks, air 1947 lah 171, tapton tea co. v. liptons ltd., and satyadeo v. amrit dhara pharmacy . learned counsel for therespondents has also brought to our notice two un-reported decisions of the calcutta and punjab high courts respectively taking the same view, but we do not think ir necessary to refer to them. the appeals to this court are, therefore, incompetent. we direct that the memoranda of appeals in these two appeals he returned to the parties to be presented to the proper court within two months from this date. the appellants in each appeal shall pay half costs of the appeal to the respondents in each appeal.2. the appellant will pay half the costs of the contesting party respondent. advocate's fees rs. 150 in each case.

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1959 (HC)

Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. Vs. Denver Chemical Manufacturing Co. and ors ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-17-1959

Reported in : AIR1959Cal636

..... to the use of the word 'phlogiston' arises at all.15. the appellant then falls back on the provisions of section 10 sub-section (2) and contends that as his trade mark 'b. i. phlogiston' has for many years been used concurrently with 'antiphlogistine,' registration should be allowed even though it may be made subject to conditions and limitations. leaving out of ..... monopoly in the english word 'phlogiston,' would require consideration. we, however, have not to deal now with that question. the word 'antiphlogistine' has already been put on the register of trade marks and the question before us is whether the word 'b. i. phlogiston' is so similar to the word 'antiphlogistine' as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion. if it ..... may sometimes even happen, if the order is placed on the telephone, that even the chemist's assistant would wrongly hear 'b. i phlogiston' for 'antiphlogistine.' close examination of the trade mark would certainly show to the customer that the things are different, but such close examination often takes place long after the actual purchases and--often the examination is made just ..... the word 'b. i. phlogiston' in white on a dark background with the name of the appellant, bengal immunity company ltd., and its address calcutta below the same as the trade mark for certain medicinal preparation. as originally made the application was for registration only of the word 'b. i. phlogiston'. the registrar pointed out the objection to registration of this word .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 19 1959 (HC)

E. Griffiths Hughes Ltd. Vs. Vick Chemical Co.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-19-1959

Reported in : AIR1959Cal654

..... quite honestly, that it accurately represents the facts.34. it has at the same time been pointed out that merely because several affidavits filed in trade mark oases or passing off cases are precisely in the sane form, it does not follow that any of these affidavits has been obtained by any improper ..... evidence as to user which has been adduced in this case. now it is well-settled that in the case of all applications for registration of trade marks, including opposed applications, the rights of the party or parties are to be determined as at the date of the application for registration. the ..... proviso does not apply then the 'acquired distinctiveness' is not conclusive, and the registrar has to find that adaptability to distinguish is present in the trade mark proposed to be registered.19. with these introductory words on the question of interpretation of section 6 of the act i now pass on to the ..... read with sub-section (3) of section 6. the expression 'distinctive' is defined in sub-section (2) as meaning some quality or feature in the trade mark which earmarks the goods as distinct from the goods of other manufacturers or producers. but sub-section (3) of section 6 provides what factors the registrar ..... it is not distinctive of the goods of the appellant and is not adapted to distinguish their goods. furthermore the registration of the appellant's trade mark is likely to deceive and cause confusion and as such the registration of it is prohibited by section 8 (a) of the act.15. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1959 (HC)

K.N. Ganesh Vs. Chief Presidency Magistrate, Egmore, Madras and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-11-1959

Reported in : AIR1959Mad519

..... not concerned with adjudication of rights. if the petitioner has acquired a right to use a particular name for his publication either by reputation or under the provisions of the trade marks act, the remedy for him will be in the civil court.13. though no question of title is involved, permitting the publication of a newspaper or journal under the same ..... the law there is no right to prevent the use of a name by any person in connection with his trade or business except where one has acquired a property to it under the ordinary law or under the statutes like trade marks act etc. if two persons want to use the same name for their respective newspapers no question of right would ..... thereafter: however the petitioner was running his office in the same premises under the name of manikkodi kariyalayam dealing with books, journals etc. he claims that his business operations and trading transactions had become associated in the mind of the public with the name of manikkodi.with a view to renew the publication of the journal the petitioner filed on 25 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1959 (HC)

T.i. Muhammad Zumoon Sahib Vs. Fathimunnisa Alias Bibijan and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-21-1959

Reported in : (1960)1MLJ270

..... the suit was for are injunction to restrain the defendant from infringing a registered trade mark. admittedly one mahomed yoonus sahib was the person in whose name the said trade mark was duly registered with the registrar of trade marks, bombay, the trade mark being '703 yoonus beedi'. yoonus died on 8th may, 1953 and it is ..... title already exists in the legal representative and on proof of such title to his satisfaction, the registrar registers him as the proprietor of the trade mark.3. in any event the entire discussion is academic, because before the judgment was delivered in the case the plaintiffs filed into court an ..... on whom the right has devolved would be entitled to the same right which the original registered proprietor had for the use of the registered trade mark. it is true that section 35 prescribes a procedure for the assignee of the representative to have registration of his title. the fallacy in ..... of the trial, however, they did obtain an order of the registrar on 7th august, 1954, recognising the title of the plaintiffs to the trade mark. with leave of the court the order of the registrar, was received in evidence and at their request the defendant was given leave to file ..... and the registrar shall on receipt of the application and on proof of title to his satisfaction, register him as the proprietor of the trade mark in respect of the goods in respect of which the assignment or transmission has effect, and shall cause particulars of the assignment or transmission .....

Tag this Judgment!


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