Advanced Search Results

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 … created By Jane Anderson printed and bound by William Clowes Ltd., England on page No. 34, 35 & 37. This also shows that this product is prior published. These are expired Products and are in public domain

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

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

Micolube India Limited Vs. Rakesh Kumar Trading as Saurabh Industries ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

suit for infringement of registered design is maintainable against the another registered proprietor of the design under the Designs Act, 2000; (2) Whether there can be availability of remedy of passing off in the absence of express saving or … whether the registration is prima facie evidence of validity. The question under reference rather invites the construction of Section 22 of the Design Act, 2000 so as to discern whether it permits a suit for infringement of … which is similar in many respects to a patent monopoly. (Emphasis Supplied) 37. The legislative history of Design Act in India also makes it abundantly

G.Raghu Babu vs Muralikrishnan

Court : Chennai

his novel and innovative design vide application No. 297504 in class 12-05 dated 13/09/2017 under the provisions of Designs Act, 2000. The said design registration is valid till 2.9. Hence, it is clear that the Appellant is the proprietor … Vinoth Brick Works, Z-275, 5th Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 047. ... RespondentsAppeal Suit is filed under Section 96 r/w. Order XLI, Rule 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code praying to set aside the judgment

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 … Act qua the product created from the artistic work when industrially applied. 37. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent

Pranda Jewelry Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Aarya 24 kt and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

The definition of 'Design' in the Designs Act, 1911 is different from the definition of 'Design' in the Designs Act, 2000. Section 2(d) of the Designs Act, 2000 does not include any 'artistic work' as defined in clause (c) of … else the protection under the Designs Act qua the product created from the artistic work when industrially applied. 37. ….. 38. Thus, while it is not open to the respondent to reproduce such paintings per se, which

Sparejon Samuel Vs. The Director of Town and Country Planning and Anot ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

Subject : Land Acquisition

view taken by this Court in various cases also. In W.P.No.5630 of 2000 (SV.P.N.S.S.Sivaramalingam Vs. Commissioner, Virudhunagar Municipality and another) K.P.SIVASUBRAMANIAM,J by order dated 20.02.2001, … Section 38 of the Act, and the properties are deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment or designation. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as follows:- "8. Likewise, Section 36 of Act 35 of … 27 for the purpose of acquiring the land, by agreement or by way of declaration and thereafter, under Section 37(2) the property is deemed to be released from such reservation. Section 38 reads as under:- "Section 38. Release

Smt. Sudarshan Chopra and ors. Vs. Vijay Kumar Chopra and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : ArbitrationCompany

Acts : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 2, 5, 7, 8, 11(6), 11(7), 37, 39, 54 and 57; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 10E, 10F, 397 and 398; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : [2003]117CompCas660(P& H)

arbitrator made under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1996. Reference in this behalf has been made to Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, by learned counsel for the respondents. The aforesaid provision is reproduced hereunder :'3. … concepts on arbitration and conciliation of different legal systems of the world and thus contained provisions which were designed for universal application. The abovesaid statement of objects and reasons in para 3 states that : '3. Though

Cit Vs. M/S V.R.V. Breweries and Bottling Industries Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Income Tax

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 37, 35A, 40A(2)

was thus of the view that the payment made by the assessee towards use of trademarks, brand names, designs and get up were in the nature of capital expenditure, and that SWCL had authorized the assessee in … For the aforesaid reasons, the Assessing Officer rejected the alternative claim of the assessee to allow deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short „I.T. Act). Furthermore, having held that it was in the

Bombay Environmental Action Group and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra an ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Environment

Reported in : 2001(4)ALLMR684; (2002)104BOMLR902

The main Writ Petition No. 1344 of 2000 filed by Bombay Environmental Action Group is a public interest litigation impugning various permissions and sanctions granted … on long term basis. In the year 1921 itself the 'Collector's Rules' were also brought into force under Section 37 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 for governing activities in the Koregaon Park area. Thereafter on 15th … generally associates with urban areas situate in the heart of a growing city like Pune, the lanes are designed as and given the Impression of being leafy, thickly planted avenues, the area has the general character of