Advanced Search Results

Gopal Glass Works Ltd. Vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs ...

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 19, 19(2), 36 and 51; ;Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Section 2(1); ;Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 479; ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Section 2; ;Designs Act, 1911 - Section 51A

Reported in : (2007)1CALLT290(HC),2006(3)CHN188,2006(33)PTC434(Cal)

Indira Banerjee, J.1. The Court: This appeal under Section 19(2) read with Section 36 of the Designs Act, 2000, hereinafter referred to as the said Act, is from an order dated 20th September, 2004 of the Assistant

Dart Industries Inc. and anr. Vs. Techno Plast and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 11, 18, 19, 20, 22, 22(2)(3), 22(3) and 29; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13, 14, 15, 17, 45, 51, 53 and 55; Designs Rules, 2001; Designs Act, 1911; Patent Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : 2007(35)PTC285(Del)

this case who have filed this suit for permanent injunction against the defendants under Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000 read with Section 55 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiff No. 1 is a company incorporated under … 98, 956. CONTAINER- 172740/Dt-29-11-1996 30, 31, 32 -- 4MODULAR MATE Pg 126OVAL7. CRYSTAL SHEER 172739/Dt-29-11-1996 100, 101, -- 36, 37, TUMBLER WITH Pg 128 102, 103 38, 39, 40 LID8. CLASSIC 176605/Dt-5-06-1998 99 8, 36 244 to

Mattel, Inc. and ors. Vs. Mr. Jayant Agarwalla and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trademarks Act, 1999 - Sections 11(6), 27, 29 and 36; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 14, 15 and 15(2); Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 6, 15(2) and 47(2); Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 3; Designs Act, 1911; Lanham Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; Designs Rules, 2001 - Rule 10

Reported in : 153(2008)DLT548; LC2008(3)298; 2008(38)PTC416(Del)

of different nature of rights. Insofar as the industrial designs are concerned, the protection is provided under the Designs Act, 2000, which came into force from May, 2001 and repealed the earlier Designs Act, 1911. An important and relevant … searchingly'. 18. It was next urged that the plaintiffs cannot seek enforcement of the trademark SCRABBLE, because of Section 36 of the Trademarks Act, which reads as follows:36. Saving for words used as name or description or an

Bharat Glass Tube Limited Vs. Gopal Glass Works Limited

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 1, 1(3), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 11(2), 12, 17, 18, 19, 22, 32, 36, 37, 44 and 51; Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 51A; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2 and 2(1); Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2; Registered Designs Act, 1949; Designs Rules, 2001 - Rules 11 and 29

Reported in : AIR2008SC2520; LC2008(2)173; (2008)5MLJ939(SC); 2008(37)PTC1(SC); 2008(8)SCALE4; (2008)10SCC657; 2008AIRSCW3509; 2008AIRSC2520; [2008] 7 SCR 397

up and colour shades and the same were registered and/or were awaiting registration as industrial designs under the Designs Act, 2000 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act of 2000) and the Rules framed thereunder. For production of … set aside the registration of the respondent. Aggrieved against this order the respondent filed a regular appeal under Section 36 of the Act of 2000 before the High Court. Learned Single Judge after considering the matter reversed the

Lupin Ltd. and Another Vs. Johnson and Johnson and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

Trademarks Act with the provisions of the Designs Act and the Patents Act. It is submitted that the Designs Act, 2000 [Section 22(4) read with Section 19] and the Patents Act [Section 10 read with Section 64] (unlike Trademarks Act) … of his business or any bona fide description of character or quality of his goods or services. Similarly, Section 36 provides for saving of words for use of name, address or description of goods or services. 13. Chapter

Microfibres Inc. Vs. Girdhar and Co. and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 6, 11, 13, 13(2), 14, 15, 15(1), 15(2), 16, 22, 40, 63, 67; Copyright Act, 1967 - Sections 15; Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 11(2), 12 and 19(1); Design Act of 1911 - Sections 2(5); Patent and Designs Act; Patent Act; Trade Marks Act; U.K. Designs Act, 1949 - Sections 1(3); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2(1); Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 415, 420 and 479; New Design Rules, 2001; Copyright Law

Reported in : LC2009(2)229; 2009(40)PTC519(Del)

that the learned Single Judge held that the designs in question were capable of being registered under the Designs Act, 2000 and consequently the appellant was not entitled to seek protection under the copyright law as the designs had … Dart Industries Inc. and FAO (OS) No. 447/2008 filed by Mattel Inc., on the question of interpretation of Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act read with Section 2(d) of the Designs Act and Section 15(2) of the … would enjoy lesser period of protection in case of a registered design. 36. This clearly shows that the legislature intended that even if the artistic

Itc Limited Vs. The Controller of Patents and Designs and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : MRTP

Judgment On :6. h March, 2017 Soumen Sen, J.:- This is an appeal under Section 36 of the Designs Act, 2000 from a decision of the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs on 14th June, 2016 in respect of

Anuradha Doval Vs. The Controller of Patents and Designs and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : MRTP

Sen, J.:- The appeal is directed against an order dated 10th December, 2014 under Section 36 of the Designs Act, 2000 by which the application for cancellation of the design registered on 7th May, 2009 being registered design No.222799

Lucky Exports Vs. the Controller of Patents and Designs and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Education

The Court : This appeal has been filed under section 36 of the Designs Act 2000. The case of the appellant is that Coaster Brake Hub was manufactured and marketed by Russia since 1920.

M.C.Jayasingh Vs. Mishra Dhatu Nigam Limited

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

Side Rules, Section 108 read with Section 50(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 and Section 22(2)(b) of the Designs Act, 2000. ----- For Plaintiff : Mr.M.Sundar For Defendant-1 : Mr.V.Chandrakanthan For Defendants 2&3 : Mr.C.Manishankar For Defendant-4 : Mr.N.L.Rajah … power of attorney. There is authority for this view in Bengal Jute Mills v. Jewraj Heeralal, AIR1943Cal.13, AIR1948Mad 369, ILR1939Nag 515 : [AIR1939Nag. 242]. and AIR1941Nag 159. In these cases it was held that a plaintiff can