Advanced Search Results

Ammini Karnan Vs. Intellectual Property Appellate Board

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property

issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to declare as Ultra Vires Section 2(k) and Section 87 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 as they are beyond the powers of the Government based on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court … have been filed by the writ petitioner, the evidentiary value of such stereo-typed affidavits has to be considered. Section 129 of the Act is only an enabling provision for filing affidavit of evidence, in lieu of formal examination

7 Eleven Inc ( A Delaware Limited Liability Company) Vs The Deputy Reg ...

Court : Chennai

2 of 2025 respectively in both by SKRJ) ...Respondents in both appeals APPEALS under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 praying that (T)CMA(TM) No.110 of 2023:(i) the impugned order dated 18.7.2014 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Trade … to the aforesaid amendment and in exercise ofpowers under Clauses 37 & 38 of the Letters Patent and Section 129 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Madras High Court has framed the Madras High Court Intellectual

P.M. Diesels Ltd. Vs. Daimler Chrysler Ag

Court : Trademark

Subject : Intellectual Property

Reported in : (2005)(31)PTC275Reg

the notice of opposition come within the ambit of Sections 9(1)(a), 9(2)(a), 11(1), 11(3) and 18(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as Act). I shall examine all the objections one by one, but for the sake … in the absence of the same, there is no evidentiary value of evidence with regard to use under Section 129 of the Act, 1999 and as such, no reputation and goodwill of the mark can be assessed, whereas

Onyx Therapeutics, Inc. Vs.union of India & Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

applicable in the present case for the reason that the said two judgments relate to provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, wherein admittedly there is no provision to cross-examine the witnesses. Section 129 of the TMA referred to in

Consim Info Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Google India Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property

say that the dispute on hand has to be decided in the context of the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Section 28 of the Act gives an indication of the rights conferred by registration of Trade Marks. Under Sub-Section

Creative Tours and Travels (India) Private Limited Vs. Intellectual Pr ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

tours and travel arrangements, manpower consultancy and recruitment. 4. Respondent No.1 is a statutory authority constituted under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Respondent No.2 is the Registrar of Trade Marks, Trade Marks Registry, Mumbai. The Registrar has registered a trade … (1932) 49 RPC 88 (Para 35). Comparative Citation: 2016 (4) AIR(Bom) R 129, … preliminary provisions, including definitions. The Appellate Board, which has passed the impugned order, is a Board established under Section 83. Prior thereto, we must see the definition of the term "mark", which is to be found in

Dharampal Satyapal Sons Private Limited vs.mr. Akshay Singhal & Or ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

trademark enjoys.10. Well known marks and trans-border reputation of brands was recognized by Courts in India, even before Trade Marks Act, 1999 came into force. In , the manufacturers of Mercedes Benz sought an injunction against the Defendants who were … scheme and uniqueness or declaring the plaintiffs‟ trademarks „PULSE‟ as a “well known” trademark within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (zg) read with CS(COMM) 129/2019 Page 1 of 16 Section 11 (6) of the Trademarks Act,

Sri Pattatharasiamman Textiles, Registered Firm Rep. by Its Partner, P ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Sales Tax/VAT

Acts : Indian Partnership Act - Sections 69(2); Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959; Central Sales Tax Act, 1956; Trade and Merchandise Mark Act, 1958 - Sections 78 and 79; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 420

Reported in : (2009)6MLJ470; 2009(41)PTC427(Mad)

that other mark as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion. As per Section 2(1)(h) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. After all, the function of a trade mark is to give an indication to the purchaser of the

M/S. Classic Equipments (P) Ltd., New Delhi Vs. the Assistant Registra ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : MRTP

Trade Marks. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant. He submitted that Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 read with Rule 64(1) of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 creates a mandate against the Registrar of Trade

Kalpana Mehta and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

a Trade Mark case under various sections of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 [repealed by the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (47 of 1999), this Court referred to the Eighth Report on the Trade Marks Bill, 1993 submitted by … by the Railway Administration to avoid their exploitation. 96 (1987) 1 SCC700107 129. In State of Maharashtra v. Milind and others 97 , the issue … of parliamentary 81 proceedings and its privilege N. Reliance on parliamentary proceedings as 91 O. P. external aids Section 57(4) of the Indian Evidence Act The decisions in which parliamentary standing committee report/s have been referred to