Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-26-1965
Reported in : AIR1967Mad148
..... manner known to and recognised by law. in this case it is not claimed that the appellant was the first inventor or the first owner of the trade mark. on his own showing when the trade mark had been invented and owned by one viswanathan and had also been used by the partnership firm, the appellant cannot claim to be the proprietor unless the ..... language means sun. it is interesting to notice that the opposition to registration was as the instance of messrs. lever brothers on the ground that the pictorial representation of the trade mark, prabhat soap, was deceptively similar to that of sunlight, and that the use of the word prahabat, the hindi equivalent of the english word, sunlight, would cause deception and confusion ..... over india through newspapers cinema feature film, advertisement bills in about twelve languages and undoubtedly command the largest sales. it may als be mentioned that in the user of these trade marks and labels consisting of the word or device, sun or sunlight a label bearing blue, red and yellow colour scheme(with clear and distinctive features) has been uniformly used. evidence ..... to law and on merits, after the applications are duly advertised and after hearing oppositions if any to such registration. it is after this remand that the asst registrar of trade marks, madras by his order dated 16-9-1960 rejected the two aforesaid applications of the applicant.(4) messrs. hindustan lever limited, the respondent herein contested the applications for registration in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-18-1965
Reported in : AIR1965SC1442; 2SCR756
..... judgment of a single judge of the bombay high court to a division bench of that high court against the decision of the registrar of trade marks under the trade marks act, 1940. section 76(1) of the said act provided that 'an appeal shall lie from any decision of the registrar under this ..... the bombay high court was attracted. we do not see any justification for this argument. one of the contentions raised before the court was that the trade marks act created a new tribunal and conferred a new appellate jurisdiction on the high court. this court rejected that contention with the following words : ' ..... of the letters patent for the bombay high court. notwithstanding the said omission this court in the said case held that the appeal under the trade marks act was an addition of a new subject-matter of appeal to the appellate jurisdiction already exercised by the high court and that the rules ..... , his judgment became subject to appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent of the bombay high court there being nothing to the contrary in the trade marks act. on the second question, this court held thus : 'we are therefore of the opinion that section 108 of the government of india act, ..... 1915. on the first question, this court held that the high court being seized as such of the appellate jurisdiction conferred by section 76 of the trade marks act, 1940, it had to exercise that jurisdiction in the same manner as it exercise its other appellate jurisdiction and when such jurisdiction was exercised .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-30-1965
Reported in : AIR1966Guj248; (1966)GLR341(GJ)
..... & bros. ltd. : 4scr1028 . in that case the respondents, a company registered in england, manufactured sewing threads with the device of an eagle with widespread wings known as 'eagle mark' as their trade mark and since 1896 that thread was being sold in the indian markets on an extensive scale. the appellants, a company registered in india, began in 1940 to sell sewing ..... courts possessed when the act of 1915 came into force but also in respect of jurisdictions conferred on the high court by subsequent legislation such as section 76 of the trade marks act, and that the high court had to exercise its appellate jurisdiction under section 76 of the act in the same manner as it exercised its other appellate jurisdiction therefore ..... contention was that the judgment delivered by the learned single judge was in an appeal under section 76 of the trade marks act and was not delivered pursuant to section 108 of the government of india act and therefore was not appealable under clause 15 of the letters patent to the division ..... raised was whether the high court could exercise appellate jurisdiction conferredon it by section 108 of the government of india act, 1915 in respect of a matter arising under the trade marks act, 1940 which by section 76(1) provided for an appeal to the high court from a decision of the registrar under the act or the rules made thereunder. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-21-1965
Reported in : (1965)67BOMLR792; 57ITR428(Bom)
..... and had also built its own organisation suited for the distribution and promotion of certain products relating to which ciba basle had patents and had registered trade marks. use of indian patents and/or trade marks relating to these products was allowed by the the ciba basle to the assessee. the assessee wanted to obtain from ciba basle scientific and technical knowledge. ..... by ciba pharma towards technical consultancy and technical service rendered by ciba basle and the consideration paid for by ciba pharma to ciba basle for the use of patents and trade marks is not an expenditure allowable under section 10(2)(xii). he, however, contended that part of the technical and research contribution, which is referable to 'research work done ..... by ciba pharma : (a) contribution towards technical consultancyand technical service rendered and researchwork done. 5%(b) contribution towards cost of raw materialused for experimental work. 3%(c) royalties on trade marks used by ciba pharma. 2%----total... 10%----8. the said technical research contribution of 10% was reduced to 6% with effect from january 1, 1949. it has been stated ..... experience. therefore, the parties have agreed that ciba pharma shall pay to ciba basle a technical and research contribution for the use of its indian patents and/or trade marks referring to the said products. the technical and research contribution is at the same time a consideration for the scientific and technical assistance and will refund partly ciba basle .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-20-1965
Reported in : AIR1969Bom24; (1968)70BOMLR37
..... affidavit of bery dated 8th december 1959. ln para 15 of that affidavit, it is stated that any one in india using the trade mark 'caltex' as a trade mark on goods not of the manufacture of caltex (india) ltd would be using it merely for the purpose of deceiving the public into ..... publicity is wide spread and large. in 1956 they spent over a million rupees on advertisements. the goods in respect of which they use the trade mark 'caltex' are mainly petroleum, kerosene and lubricants like greases and oils etc. the goods in respect of which the applicant seeks registration are mainly ..... filed the affidavit of bery dated 30th july 1959, in which he denied in so many words that the applicant was the proprietor of the trade mark 'caltex'.16. to 28. (after examining the documentary evidence his lordship proceeded):29. the judgment of mr. justice shah contains the following passage ..... stated in the affidavit that he was importing various articles including watches, and was manufacturing presentation articles. he has further stated that he adopted the trade mark 'caltex' in or about the year 1955, and that he placed the first order for caltex watches with the manufacturers in switzerland in april ..... and caltex petrol and various other oil products of the opponents? (2) whether there was any dishonesty in the applicant's adopting and introducing the trade mark 'caltex' in respect of watches in the indian market? (3) whether the learned judge should have interfered in the exercise of the discretion .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-23-1965
Reported in : AIR1967Mad186
..... under this court. there is no restriction regarding the power of the high court in disposing of the appeal. the corresponding section in the english trade marks, 1938 is section 52, which provides that in any appeal from the decision of the registrar, the court shall have and exercise the same ..... discretion, but are very reluctant to interfere unless the registrar is clearly wrong'. in re: union carbide and carbon corporation's application to register a trade mark, (1952) 69 r.p.c. 306 the learned judge stated that position as follows: 'if i were satisfied that in arriving at decision that ..... confusion................ in cases in which the tribunal considers that there is doubt as to whether deception is likely, the application should be refused. a trade mark is likely to deceive or cause confusion by its resemblance to another already on the register if it is likely to do so in the ..... section 12(1) prohibits the registration of a trademark in respect of goods or description of goods which is identical with or deceptively similar to a trade mark which is already registered in the name of a different proprietor in respect of the same goods or description of goods. thus, while section 12 ..... as v.s. raju mudaliar and sons, in the last decade of the last century and was manufacturing and selling perfumery and allied preparations and the trade mark 'raja'. the applicant, who established his concern manyam and co, in 1920 and acted for sometime as distributors for raja products of messrs. v. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-23-1965
Reported in : (1966)2MLJ570
..... under this act. there is no restriction regarding the power of the high court in disposing of the appeal. the corresponding section in the english trade marks act, 1938, is section 52, which provides that in any appeal from the decision of the registrar, the court shall have and exercise the ..... discretion, but are very reluctant to interfere unless the registrar is clearly wrong.15. in union carbide and carbon corporation's application to register a trade mark 69 r.p.c. 306, 308 the learned judge stated the position as follows:if i were satisfied that in arriving at that decision the ..... the learned counsel for the respondent that the appellate court will be loath to interfere with the findings of fact arrived at by the registrar of trade marks. the views of english courts vary considerably as to when the registrar's discretion may be overruled. it is summarised by halsbury's laws of ..... confusion... in cases in which the tribunal considers that there is doubt as to whether deception is likely, the application should be refused. a trade mark is likely to deceive or cause confusion by its resemblance to another already on the register if it is likely to do so in the course ..... applicant as v. raju mudaliar and sons, in the last decade of the last century and was manufacturing and selling perfumery and allied preparations under the trade mark 'raja'. the applicant, who established his concern manyam & company in 1920 and acted for sometime as distributors for raja products of messrs. v. raju .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-20-1965
Reported in : AIR1965SC1449; 2SCR800
..... court of mysore an action in the nature of a passing off action against the appellants - hereinafter called 'the defendants' - for a declaration that they 'are exclusive owners of the trade mark consisting of the letters r.s.f. and no. 806', for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from passing off their washing soap as the goods of the plaintiffs and ..... for incidental reliefs. 2. by section 105 of the trade and merchandise marks act 43 of 1958 a passing off action whether the trade mark is registered or unregistered may be instituted in any court not inferior to a district court having jurisdiction to try be suit. it appears ..... court entertained the plaint and also an application for interim injunction restraining 'the defendants their agents or servants from using the trade mark r.s.f. on washing soap manufactured by them and from selling washing soap bearing the said offending mark pending disposal of the case.' by order dated may 29, 1964 the high court granted the temporary injunction in terms of ..... matters in respect of which by special acts it has been specifically invested with jurisdiction. the high court is competent to exercise original jurisdiction under section 105 of the trade and merchandise marks act 43 of 1958 if it is invested with the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of a district court, and not otherwise, and the high court of mysore not being .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-01-1965
Reported in : AIR1966Cal311
..... with the law and was set aside. it is this point which has been canvassed in appeal filed by the registrar of trade marks and the deputy registrar of trade marks and has to be decided by us. 2. in order to decide this point, it will be necessary to consider the provisions ..... made to the high court under section 109 of the said act is dismissed, it being declared that the order made by the deputy registrar, trade marks. calcutta, dated 27th august, 1961 cancelling the registration dated 20th june, 1960 is a competent order. the proceedings foe registration may now continue in ..... issued the certificate. as the opposition had not been decided, the proceedings had not rightfully come to an end. in our opinion, the deputyregistrar of trade marks, calcutta, who had been properly authorised under sub-section (2) of section 4 for that purpose, could proceed and was competent to proceed under ..... prescribed manner who shall upon receipt of such notice rectify the register accordingly.' 5. on the question of jurisdiction of the deputy registrar of trade marks, the learned judge has repelled the contention that he has any inherent power. the learned judge is of the opinion that inasmuch as there ..... all other matters connected with the above. he has been authorised to pass final orders as to acceptance and refusal of applications tor registration of trade marks. the other functions which have been delegated are not necessary to be considered in this case. a copy of the authorisation appears at pages .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-23-1965
Reported in : AIR1966Cal247,69CWN683
..... , 1958. 10. in the premises there will be an order that pending the hearing and final disposal of application no. c.l. 48 to the registrar of trade marks at the calcutta office of the trade marks registry, suit no. 1283 of 1964 (formica international ltd. v. caprihans (india) private ltd and others) and all proceedings therein be stayed so far as the ..... is an application for stay of all proceedings in suit no. 1283 of 1964, pending the hearing and final disposal of an application to the registrar of trade marks at the calcutta office of the trade marks registry. the respondent no. 1 which is the plaintiff in the said suit has instituted the suit against the petitioner and other defendants praying for perpetual ..... ..... the court trying the suit (hereinafter referred to as the court), shall,-- (i) if any proceedings for rectification of the register in relation to the plaintiff's or defendant's trade mark are pending before the registrar of the high court stay the suit pending the final disposal of such proceedings; ........... sub-section (4)--the final order made in any rectification proceedings ..... injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the plaintiff's registered trade mark consisting of the word ' formica ' and from passing off goods which are not the plaintiffs goods as and for the plaintiff's goods and for other reliefs. the petitioner .....Tag this Judgment!