Advanced Search Results
Vivek Narayan Sharma Vs. Union Of India
Supreme Court of India
Jan-02-2023
Land Acquisition
xxxx (d) “rupee coin” means (***) rupees which are legal tender in India under the provisions of the Coinage Act, 2011 (11 of 2011)” 13 7.4 Chapter II of the Act deals with Incorporation, Capital, Management and Business. Section … to be nominated by the Central Government, one from each of the four Local Boards as constituted under Section 9; iii) Ten Directors to be nominated by the Central Government; and iv) Two Government officials to be nominated
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskNafis Qazi & Anr. Vs.union of India & Anr.
Delhi
Jan-11-2018
MRTP
filed counter affidavits.4. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.2, our attention is drawn to the Coinage Act, 2011 which is an enactment inter alia intended to consolidate the laws relating to coinage and minting as well … to mean putting a coin into circulation for use as money.8. Section 3 of the legislation enables the Central Government to establish a mint by notification.9. So far as the minting of coins is concerned, Section 4
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskInternational Foodstuffs Co. LLC. Vs. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. and Ano ...
Mumbai
Apr-11-2016
Land Acquisition
tea, rice, artificial coffee, bread, pastry and so on. The Charminar principle, if I might be permitted a coinage of my own, from Vazir Sultan must apply here. 19.Mr. Tulzapurkar then submits that as regards passing off, … mark and the label mark are both registered in Class 30. In 2011 the Defendants applied for registration for the mark LONDONDERRY . This is … 13.What Mr. Bhagat points out in saying this is actually a facet central to Mr. Tulzapurkar s case for the defence. He says that the … the Plaintiff for its ice cream that the Plaintiff is entitled to an injunction on both causes of action, i.e., trademark infringement and passing off. 2. I disagree. My reasons follow. 3. To begin with, there is … other goods in view of the provisions of Section 47 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. 14.Every … In 2011-2012, they were roughly Rs. 5.5 Crores. 9.The Plaintiff says that the Defendants dishonestly adopted their
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Sunflame Enterprises P. Ltd. vs Sumit Kishan Sharma & Anr.
Delhi
Jan-31-2026
Land Acquisition
Mark, which is confusingly and deceptively similar, and almost identical, to the Petitioner’s Mark. Such ingenious adoption and coinage cannot be a mere coincidence. The adoption of the Impugned Mark further shows slavish imitation of the Petitioner’s … marks as has been held in Hindustan Unilever limited v. Ashique Chemicals, 2011 SCC OnLine Bom 1061. 4.5 The Petitioner has registrations over the Petitioner’s … likely to wonder about its association with the plaintiff’s. Imitation of the central idea or commercial impression of a mark, not just its visual orSignature … JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAJUDGMENTTEJAS KARIA, J1. The present Rectification Petition has been filed under Section 57 ofthe Trade Marks Act, 1999 (“Act”) seeking rectification of the Register of Trade Marks by cancellation / removal of the Trade Mark, … 2127.09.20119. 2627696 01.01.2006 Class 2114.11.201310. 572529 01.02.1998 Class 904.05.199211. 448261 Proposed to Class 915.01.1986 be used12. 448262
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›