Advanced Search Results

Rajesh Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : CriminalMedia and Communication

Reported in : 1996(3)WLC582; 1996(2)WLN92

the owner of such film so as to attract penal provisions of Section 63 & 68A of the Copyright Act, 1957. On such material before , the learned Magistrate had primafacie reasons to believe that the offence punishable under … directed against the order dated December, 19, 1994 whereby the petitioner stands charged with the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and under Sections 63, 64 & 68A of the Copy Right Act, 1957.2.

Smithkline Beecham Plc and Another Vs. Mr. Sunil Singhi and Another

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 20 - Order 7, Rule 10 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2, 3 & 4; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 62(2); Copyright Act, 1956; Marks Act - Sections 55(1);

Reported in : 2001IVAD(Delhi)849; 91(2001)DLT461; 2001(2)RAJ446

entertained and tried in Delhi or any other Court in India. He argued that Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') did not permit the dispute to be adjudicated in Delhi especially since … 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Marks Act) with effect from 21.10.1982 in favor of the plaintiff. On 7.9.1999 the following ex parte ad interim orders were granted: 'I.A. No. 8797/99Notice for 31st January, 2000. The plaint

Shree Rajmoti Industries Vs. Rajmoti Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 20(2) - Order 7, Rule 11; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 62 and 62(2); Trade Marks Act - Sections 134(2)

Reported in : 115(2004)DLT212; 2005(30)PTC38(Del)

in the plaint. 11. The Division Bench has also erred in its construction of Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Section 62 reads: '62. Jurisdiction of court over matters arising under this Chapter.__(1) Every suit or other civil proceedings … must vacate the stay order while returning the plant to plaintiff for presenting same to an appropriate Court. 7. Thus the thrust of the arguments of the learned counsel for the defendant/applicant is that unless and until

Titan Industries Vs. NitIn P. JaIn and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 7, Rule 11; ;Trade Marks and Merchandise Act, 1958 - Sections 106 and 106(1); ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 55 and 62(2); ;Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 135

Reported in : 126(2006)DLT132; 2006(32)PTC95(Del)

of trade mark under the Act but it is also a suit for infringement of copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957 and thus in view of the provisions of Section 55 of the Copyright Act, relief of damages as … A.K. Sikri, J.1. The defendants have moved this application under Order VII Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 106(1) of the Trade Marks and

Ushodaya Enterprises Limited Vs. T.V. Venugopal and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13, 13(1), 14, 17, 44, 45, 50, 51, 55, 62 and 72; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 26 - Order 7, Rule 1; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 21, 27, 81, 105 and 106; Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 41(1)

Reported in : 2001(4)ALD723

infringement of copyright before the civil Court but have to initiate the proceedings under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957 for rectification of the copyright. It is alleged that the learned single Judge overlooked the legal position that … single Judge proceeded to examine the provisions under Sections 2, 13, 14, 44, 45, 50, 51, 55 and 72 of the Copyright Act and also referred to various decisions. The learned single Judge tracing the principles laid

Exphar Sa and anr. Vs. Eupharma Laboratories Ltd. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 60, 62, 62(1) and 62(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 20 - Order 7, Rules 10 and 11

Reported in : AIR2004SC1682; 2004(2)AWC1515(SC); 2004(73)DRJ663; JT2004(3)SC1; (2004)2MLJ156(SC); 2004(28)PTC251(SC); 2004(2)SCALE589; (2004)3SCC688

contained in the plaint.11. The Division Bench has also erred in its construction of Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Section 62 reads: '62. Jurisdiction of court over matters arising under this Chapter. - (1) Every suit or other … of profit to the plaintiff, as damages within three months from the date of decision by this court.' 7. Both the respondents and the appellants preferred appeals from this decision. The respondents did not question the territorial

Vidya Prakashan Mandir Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsCriminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act, 1978 - Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2 and 63

Reported in : 2002(3)AWC2473; 2003CriLJ202; (2002)3UPLBEC2641

Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Course Books Act. 1978 and Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957. 2. According to the allegations of the first information report the complainant had received information from the District

Dabur India Ltd. Vs. K.R. Industries

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 25C, 55, 55(1), 62, 62(1) and 62(2); Trade Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 27(2), 55, 106 and 106(2); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 134, 134(2), 135 and 135(1); Copyright Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 20 and 94 - Order 2, Rules 2 and 3 - Order 7, Rules 7 and 11; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 125

Reported in : AIR2008SC3123; 2008(4)AWC3515(SC); LC2008(2)215; (2008)5MLJ1394(SC); 2008(37)PTC332(SC); 2008(8)SCALE385; (2008)10SCC595; 2008AIRSCW5265; 2008(3)LH(SC)2121

was alleged that the said carton constituted an `artistic work' within the meaning of Section 25-C of the Copyright Act, 1957 (the 1957 Act). Respondent is said to have been using an identical colour scheme lay out, arrangement of … the appellant. A suit was filed by the appellant against the respondent in the Delhi High Court. Paragraph 7 of the plaint reads thus:7. In December 1999, the plaintiff adopted a new carton while retaining the conical

Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Mr. Gajendra Singh and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 14, 17 and 55(1); Factories Act; Copyright Act, 1914 - Sections 5; Copyright Act, 1911; Workmen's Compensation Act; Evidence Act - Sections 40 to 42 and 43; Dramatic Copyright Act, 1833

Reported in : 2007(6)ALLMR532; 2007(6)BomCR700; (2007)109BOMLR2072; 2008BusLR161(Bom); LC2007(3)299; 2008(36)PTC53(Bom)

departure from the traditional Antakshari game; the concept note is a literary work within the meaning of the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Plaintiff had and has the exclusive right to reproduce the same and to issue copies of … prepared by Defendant No. 1 under a contract of service with the Plaintiff. This is in view of Section 17(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957, which reads as under:17. First owner of copyright Subject to the provisions … this behalf is not static. In Punjab National Bank v. Ghulam Dastagir 7 Krishna Iyer, J. observed (at SCC p. 359, para 3): 'To crystallise

The Jay Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Sh. Ramesh Aggarwal

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsCivil

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 105 and 106; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 62 and 62(2); Designs Act, 2000; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 9, 20 and 21 - Order 2, Rule 3 - Order 7, Rules 1, 10 and 11; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 134(2)

Reported in : LC2007(1)58; 2006(33)PTC561(Del)

further proceedings on 20.11.2006. Intellectual Property Rights - Territorial jurisdiction - Composite suit - Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Plaintiff filed a suit claiming infringement of trademark, infringement … was filed under the provisions of the old Act, i.e., the Trade & Merchandise Act, 1958. In para 7 at page 112 of the Report, the learned Single Judge held as follows:7. The plaintiff could not dispute