Advanced Search Results

Microforms Inc Vs. Girdhar and Co. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13(1), 14, 15, 15(2), 40, 48 and 51; ;Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2 and 2(5); Designs Act, 1911; ;Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2 and 2(1); ;Patents Act; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479; ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 15

Reported in : 128(2006)DLT238; 2006(32)PTC157(Del)

that the artistic works are actually designs relating to textile products and come within the scope of the Designs Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Designs Act, 2000). The plaintiff has failed to apply for registration of designs … The plaintiff also claims that it enjoys copyright protection in India as a consequence of the provisions of Section 40 of the Copyright Act and the Berne Convention, Universal Copyright Convention read with Indian International Copyright Order, 1999.6.

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)

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

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 … is shown in Yesterdaypaper.com magazine ad FAQ published 1962(approx. Size-10 1/2'* 13') with yesterday paper item code no-AD 4015.(iv) The product Tumbler is shown in TIAS.com with further link Copperfield's Antiques, published 1958 Tupperware ad (approx. size

Carlsberg Breweries a/S vs.som Distilleries and Breweries Limited

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

of its product, viz. beer, under the brand “TUBORG”, design whereof is registered under the provisions of the Designs Act, 2000. The novelty of the applicant’s registered design resides in the shape and configuration of the bottle.3. The plaintiff … a fraudulent imitation of the plaintiff’s registered bottle design which is liable to be injuncted by virtue of section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000. He submits that the copy must be a fraudulent or obvious imitation … Height from bottom to Shoulder 167.5mm 168.5mm Radius 9. Radius at Shoulder 40 41 10. Embossing 11. Embossing Thikness 12. Engraving logo TUBORG Engraved 0.4mm

Snc-lavalin/Acres Inc. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2007)110TTJ(Delhi)13

correspondences have been enclosed in the paper book which depict the fact that review of all drawings and designs were undertaken by the Head Office in Canada and all these drawings and designs were then submitted by … referred to as RBI) granted permission vide sanction letter dt. 16 Aug., 2000 to open project office at New Delhi and site office at Chamera, … Canadian company incorporated under Canadian law and having its registered office at Canada, incorporated under Canada Business Corporation Act, and is liable to tax in Canada. It is a joint venture company which has been incorporated only … from Reserve Bank of India. On application filed by the assessee under Section 6(6) of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as FEMA), … Rs. 32,42,301 by way of disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act with respect to the payment

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

A.Ruthramoorthy Trading as M/s. Bharani Engineering Work Vs P.Moorthy

Court : Chennai

that copyright shall not subsist under the Copyright Act in respect of anydesign which is registered under the Designs Act, 2000 ('Designs Act'). Learned counsel next referred to the examination report of the Copyright Office dated 08.06.2023, wherein the … Delhi-110 078, India. ... Respondents Prayer: Original Petition (Copyright) filed for rectification of Copyright from the Register under Section 50 of the Copyright Act,1957 read with Rule 6 of the Madras High Court Intellectual property Rights division

j.c. Bamford Excavators Limited & Anr. Vs.bull Machines Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

of drawings were functional items and would not qualify for registration of designs under Section 2(b) of the Designs Act, 2000. It was further claimed that the drawings had been specifically developed to increase the efficiency of finished products. … a technical drawing, for the purposes of industrial application of any purely functional part of a useful device.” 40. It is apparent from the above that making of three dimensional objects for the purpose of a purely

Atul Narsibhai Patel Vs. The Assistant Controller of Patents and Desin ...

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Land Acquisition

said application for cancellation. The grounds stated in both the petitions for cancellation under Section 19 of The Designs Act, 2000 were:1. That the design has been previously registered in India, 2. That the design has been published in

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