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 has claimed that the artistic work constitutes original artistic work as defined within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act. The plaintiff also claims that it enjoys copyright protection in India as a … Au-356-331 21.11.199538. PRESTIGE V Au-406-109 17.12.199742. TARSUS V Au-458-207 12.11.199946. BLACK POOL* 56. REGIA* V Au-498-306 06.12.20004. It may be noticed that in the said

Metco Polymers Pvt. Limited and Vs. Madhu Inflatables Pvt. Limited and

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 19, 22, 22(2) and 22(3); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 115

Reported in : (2005)4MLJ294

C.S.No.638 of 2003. 2. The said suit was filed by the present appellants under Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner infringing upon … by use or in any other way prior to the filing date for registration, shall not be registered. Section 5 provides for filing of application for registration of designs and Section 6 envisages registration to be in respect

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. Vs. Wyeth Limited

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 17, 19, 19(1), 22, 22(1), 22(2), 22(3), 26 and 44; Copyright Act, 1957; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 65; Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988; Registered Designs Act, 1949 - Sections 5 and 5(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 4; Designs Rules, 2001 - Rules 22 and 27

Reported in : 162(2009)DLT298; 2009(41)PTC24(Del)

in favour of the plaintiff is liable to be cancelled under the provisions of Section 19 of the Designs Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act'). According to the defendant, the plaintiff's said design registration was liable … amended by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, speaks of registrable designs and proceedings for registration. However, Section 5 of the said Registered Designs Act, 1949 makes provision for secrecy of certain designs. Section 22 of the

Rajesh Masrani Vs. Tahiliani Design Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13, 14, 15, 15(1), 15(2), 17 and 44; Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2; Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 2(1)(5); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2(1); Registration Act - Sections 48; Copyright Act, 1956 - Sections 49; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 151 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 4 - Order 43, Rule 1

Reported in : AIR2009Delhi44; 2009BusLR280(Del); LC2009(1)252

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 … exist as soon as any article to which the design has been applied has been reproduced more than 50 times by an industrial process.14. In the present case as per the averments made by the plaintiff, not

iag Co. Ltd. Vs. Triveni Glass Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 22, 22(2), 22(3), 48 and 48(2) to 48(5); ;Designs Act, 1911 - Section 53; ;Designs Rules, 1933; ;Designs Rules, 2001; ;General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section 6

Reported in : (2004)3CALLT71(HC),2004(29)PTC665(Cal),[2004]51SCL498(Cal)

was instituted by the plaintiff on August 1st, 2003; it was not pending at the commencement of the Designs Act, 2000. Section 48(4) of the Designs Act, 2000 saved only the pending proceeding. So the case of the plaintiff will … made in Sections 2(c), 10(4), 11, 23 and 28 of the Designs Act, 2000. Above all, both Section 53 of the Designs Act, 1911 and Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000 make it unlawful for any

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 … known designs or combination of known designs; or(d) comprises or contains scandalous or obscene matter, shall not be registered.Section 5 deals with the application for registration of designs. Section 6 deals with the registration to be in respect

Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare Gmbh and Co. Kg Vs. Amigo Brushes ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 19, 22(1) and 48(5); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2(1); Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2

Reported in : 109(2004)DLT41; 2004(28)PTC1(Del)

the application of such design to toothbrushes. By virtue of said design registration and Section 48(5) of the Designs Act, 2000, the plaintiff has the copyright in the design for an initial period of 5 years from the date

Telemecanique and Controls (i) Limited Vs. Schneider Electric Industri ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 151 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 64, 68, 83, 90 and 107; Patents Rules, 1972 - Rules 73 and 74; Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 2(5); Designs (Amendment) Act, 2000 - Sections 2; Indian Law

Reported in : 94(2001)DLT865

which is in substance a mere mechanical device. It is stated that the position remains the same under Designs Act, 2000 in terms of Section 2(d). This plea is being opposed by Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior counsel for … stated that subsequently LTE merged into the holding company of the respondent which merger was approved on 9.6.97. 5. The genus of the controversy between the parties arises from the fact that the technical services agreement is

Daniel Vs. A.R. Safiullah

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 19, 19(2), 19(3), 22 and 22(4); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 24 and 24(5) - Order 7, Rule 1; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 27, 105 and 106

Reported in : (2004)2MLJ91; 2004(29)PTC62(Mad)

the Court of Principal District Judge, Pudukottai to this Court, as provided both under Section 22(4) of the Designs Act, 2000 and also under Section 24(5) of the C.P.C.2. Application No. 4459 of 2003 has been filed praying to

M/s. Selvel Industries and Another Vs. M/s. Om Plast (India)

Court : Mumbai

Subject : MRTP

in this Notice of Motion for interim relief in an action in infringement and passing off under the Designs Act, 2000, is whether the Defendant s product infringes the Plaintiffs registered design. 4. I must state straight away that, … judged solely by the eye, the answer must be an unqualified yes. 5. There is then, of course, the question of similarity, and when I … mechanical device, and does not include any trade mark as defined in clause (v) of subsection (1) of section 2 of the Trade an Merchandise Marks Ac, 1958 (43 of 1958) or property mark as defined in