Advanced Search Results

Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Ucb

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2(1), 21, 21(1), 21(2), 21(4), 101, 131, 131(1) and 157; Trade Marks Rules, 2002 - Rules 47 to 57, 79, 80(4), 101, 105, 105(1) and 106; Trade Marks Rules, 1959 - Rule 53(1) and 53(2); Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959 - Rules 53, 53(2), 54 and 56

Reported in : 2005(31)PTC14(Guj)

of one month from 22.9.2003 to 21.10.03 by filing a request on Form TM-56 dated 22.9.2003. However, the Trade Marks Act, 1999 was implemented with immediate effect from 15.9.2003. The opponent filed the second request for extension of time for … was not laying down a fixed time in the Statute. This view is supported by a reading of Section 101 and Rule 106.'.:.'This interpretation is also borne out by the fact that the deeming provisions, in Rule 53(2),

Wyeth Holdings Corpn. and anr. Vs. Controller General of Patents, Desi ...

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2, 21, 21(1), 21(2), 21(3), 21(4), 21(5), 21(6), 21(7), 35E, 131, 157, 157(1) and 157(2); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 101 and 105; Trade Marks Rules, 1959 - Rules 53, 53(2) and 106; Trade Marks Rules, 2002 - Rules 50, 50(1), 50(2), 50(3), 51 and 105; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 8, Rule 1; Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 226

Reported in : 2007(34)PTC1(Guj)

Act, 1999 and Rule 105 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 are reproduction with mutatis mutandis changes, of Section 101 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and Rule 106 of the Trade Marks Rules, 1959 respectively. … Rules made thereunder are to be taken into account....The IPAB considered provisions contained in Section 131 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Rule 105 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 and then observed as under:Section 131 of the Trade

Variety Dry Fruit Stores Vs. Variety Agencies

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2, 15, 23(1), 23(2), 27(2), 29, 33, 34, 101 to 109, 110, 134, 135, 135(2) and 135(3); ;Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 14; ;Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; ;Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; ;Trade Marks Rules, 2002 - Rules 16(1) and 62(1)

Reported in : 2010(3)ALT151

27.03.2008 respectively in respect of various food and non-food varieties included in clauses 29 and 30 under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. As noticed supra, the respondent carried business by name 'Variety Agencies', which according to the appellant being strikingly … their visual representation and reference in this section to the use of a mark shall be construed accordingly.11. Section 101 describes the meaning of applying trade mark and trade descriptions and Section 102 describes falsifying and falsely applying

Sunrider Corporation Vs. Hindustan Lever Limited and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959 - Rules 52(2), 53, 53(1) and 53(2); Trade Marks Rules, 2002 - Rules 50, 50(1), 50(2), 53(2), 54, 79, 80, 80(4), 105, 105(2) and 106; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2(1), 21, 21(1), 21(2), 21(4), 101, 131, 157, 157(2) and 159

Reported in : LC2007(3)46; 2007(35)PTC388(Del)

1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1959 Rules'), no maximum time limit had been prescribed, whereas under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1999 Act') and the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the … was not laying down a fixed time in the Statute. This view is supported by a reading of Section 101 and Rule 106. Section 101 indicates that the only circumstance under which time cannot be extended by the

Sri. Manjunatha M. S. Vs. State By Arsikere Town Police

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

not acceptable since the F.I.R., is registered for the offence punishable under Section 102(i)(a)(b) r/w. 103(a) of the Trade Marks Act 1999. On further reading of the entire materials, a prima facie has been made out as against the petitioner. … TM Act is a special Act relating to trade marks. Chapter XII of the said Act in Sections 101 - 121 prescribes offences, penalties and procedure in 2 (2010) ILR6Delhi 738 - 12 - NC:2024. KHC:25896 CRL.P

M/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Sales Tax

of the trade mark or patent or a person entitled to a use thereof in terms of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. He submits that the object and purpose sought to be achieved by the Trade Marks Act, 1999 must … Commissioner, Trade Tax, U. P. vs. Varanasi Auto Sales (P) Ltd. (1996) 101 STC 555 28. For a proper appreciation of the rival contentions, it … purchase agreement dated 7.2.1996 hire financed in favour of Shri. Ajit Singh Bhimrao was liable to tax under Section 8 of the B.S.T. Act, 1959? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,

Whirlpool of India Ltd. Vs. Videocon Industries Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

Shah vs. Chottalal Ravi Karandas (AIR 1941 Bom 188); and Kemp and Co. vs. Prima Plastics (1999 Vol. 101 (1) Bom LR 65. (vi) The Trade Marks Act (Act of 1958 and Act of 1999) by use … (v) Although there is no parallel provision in the Act as in Section 30 (2) (e) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the same is irrelevant as Section 11 read with Section 2 (c) of the Act gives exclusive right

M/S Asian Paints Limited, Mumbai Vs. the Assistant Registrar of Trade ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Land Acquisition

Act, 1999 and Rule 105 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 are reproduction with mutatis mutandis changes, of section 101 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and Rule 106 of the Trade Marks Rules, 1959 respectively. … under the Act and the Rules made thereunder are to be taken into account. Section 131 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 provides as under:- Extension of time.-(1) If the Registrar is satisfied, on application made to him in the

M/S Girnar Exports, Mumbai Vs. Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks, Off ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Intellectual Property

Trading as Oswal Industries Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks 2000 PTC Del 24 (FB) “Section 131 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Rule 105 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 are reproduction, with mutatis mutandis changes, of section 101

Kishore JaIn Vs. Shri Ruplal, Trading as M/S Ambica Pharmacy

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : MRTP

respondent for using the generic word Surma/Surmi. Therefore, the applicant was compelled to file a suit under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 on groundless and unjustifiable threat against the applicant. That suit is still pending adjudication. Subsequently, the respondents registered … the respondents registered proprietor filed a FIR against the applicant under Sections 101,102, 103 and 104 of the Trade Marks Act at the Police Station, … particulars of which are briefly that the respondent/ registered proprietor had preferred a false and vexatious complaint under Section 418, 419, 420, 482, 486 - 489 read with Section 34 of IPC against ex-partners of the applicant