Advanced Search Results

Jolen Inc., Rep. by Its Constituted Attorney, Mr. A. Arulselvan Vs. Mr ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsCivil

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 11; Copyright Act - Sections 40

Reported in : (2004)3MLJ176; 2005(30)PTC385(Mad)

Paris Convention, an internationally well reputed trademark ought to be protected in India and section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 also provides for the protection of internationally well reputed trademarks. It is stated that the distinctive script with

Agro Tech Foods Ltd. Vs. Sudha Churiwal

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 11, 11(6), 21 and 107

Reported in : 2009(40)PTC33(Del)

garnered immense goodwill and has become a well-known trademark as per the definition in Section 11(6) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.5. It is submitted that in April, 2004 the Plaintiff Company came to know that the Defendant had applied

Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958 - Section 9; ;Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2(1), 11(1), 11(2) and 17

Reported in : LC2010(2)167

this Court filed by TELCO being CM(M) No. 344 of 1995 stood transferred after the enactment of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (TM Act 1999) to the IPAB. By the impugned order dated 1st October 2004, the IPAB partly allowed … mark T-SERIES was phonetically, visually and conceptually different from the trademarks of TELCO and that as required under Section 9 of the Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958 (TM Act 1958), Super Cassettes' mark had acquired distinctiveness since … mark as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion.' Under Section 11(1) (a) registration will be refused if it is either identical to or

Micolube India Ltd. Vs. Maggon Auto Centre and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2(1), 3(2), 11, 28, 28(1), 28(3), 30, 30(2), 124, 124(1), 124(2) and 135(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 151 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 4; Companies Act, 1956

Reported in : 166(2010)DLT642

under consideration being I.A. No. 3915/2009 has been filed by defendant No. 2 under Section 124(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (referred to as the CPC for brevity) … to have acquired the status of a well known trade mark within the definition of Section 2(1)(zg) and Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.6. Defendant No. 2 M/s. Motor Industries Co. Ltd., Automotive Aftermarket, Hosur Road,

Ford Motor Company and anr. Vs. Mrs. C.R. Borman and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 11, 29, 29(1), 29(4), 134 and 134(2); Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 62(2); Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 20 - Order 2 - Order 7, Rules 10 and 11

Reported in : 156(2009)DLT1; LC2008(3)418

has arisen within its jurisdiction. It has also been submitted by the Defendants that Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (Act for short) will only apply in respect of registered trademarks; that no actionable claim has arisen since … against the Plaintiffs is justified. While on the question of Objections, it will be worthwhile to refer to Section 11 of the Act for two purposes - firstly, to underscore that the Objections are still pending and secondly

Rana Steels Vs. Ran India Steels Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 29; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 7, 9, 11, 11(1), 12, 28, 28(1), 28(3), 29, 29(4), 30(2), 31, 57, 134(2) and 159(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 151 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 4; Trade Marks Rules, 2002; Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959; Trade Marks Rules, 2002 - Rule 22

Reported in : 2008(102)DRJ503; LC2008(3)62; 2008(37)PTC24(Del)

was in operation, the actual registration was done on 03.03.2006 and in view of Section 159(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, it would be deemed to be a registration under the said Act of 1999.3. It was also stated … to say, not capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of another person. Section 11(1), save as provided in Section 12, also conditionally prohibits the registration of a trade mark if, because of

M/S Achi Masala Foods (P) Ltd., Represented by Its Director AshwIn Pan ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : MRTP

17.11.1999 in class 32 from the Register of Trade Marks under sections 11, 18 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Both the applicants i.e. the sole proprietor of Aachi Spices and Foods … trade mark. The first respondent being the subsequent user is not entitled for registration under the provisions of section 11(1) (2) and (3) of the Act; b) the use of identical mark will lead the public being deceived;

Jagatjit Industries Limited Vs. The Intelectual Prop Appellate Bd. and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property

the merits of the case, it is necessary to set out the various statutory provisions contained in the Trade Marks Act, 1999:- “Section 2 - Definitions and interpretation In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-- (ze) "tribunal" means the Registrar … register, as has been held in Hardie Trading Ltd. and another v. Addisons Paint & Chemicals Ltd., (2003) 11 SCC92 It was further held that the power of the Registrar to correct his own mistakes under Section

Rajiv Jain, Trading as M/S. Vepeejay Electrical Industries Vs. Dinesh ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Education

Matched in: Judge The Honourable Ms. S. Usha, Vice Chairman &Amp; the Honourable Mr. V. Ravi, Technical Member (Trade Marks)

Rhizome Distilleries Pvt.Ltd Vs. Union of India

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 9, 11(1), 11(3), 11(10), 17, 18, 29 and 57; Trade Marks (Applications and Appeals to the Intellectual Property Appellate Board) Rules, 2003. - Rule 2

the application filed by the 4th respondent herein under sections 11(1), 11(3), 11(10), 18 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Rule 2 of the Trade Marks (Applications and Appeals to the Intellectual Property Appellate Board) Rules, 2003.2. … finding, inter alia, that'the registration of the trade mark 'IMPERIAL GOLD' is in contravention of the provisions of section 11 of the said Act; the writ petitioner's trade mark was causing confusion and deception in the minds of