Advanced Search Results

Jagdamba Oil Agency Vs. K.S. Oils Ltd. and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : Civil

Acts : Indian Trade Mark Act, 1999 - Sections 142; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 10 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 3; Constitution of India - Article 227

Reported in : 2006(1)MPHT427; 2006(33)PTC389(MP)

of District Judge Morena Annexure P-2 so also the suit under Section 142 of the Indian Trade Mark Act, 1999 Annexure P-5, filed by the petitioner before Distt. Judge, Darjeeling, inviting my attention to the provisions of Section … the plaintiff are engaged in manufacturing and sale of mustard oil and both are using a common trade mark, i.e., ('double Sher'). It is the case of the defendant/respondents that they are using the aforesaid trade mark

The International Association of Lions Clubs Vs. the Association of Li ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 142; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 30(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 1, Rule 8

Reported in : 2008(2)BomCR391; (2007)109BOMLR1109; LC2007(2)358

regarding groundless threats of action for infringement in legal proceedings, in terms of Section 142 of the Trade Marks Act,1999. According to the plaintiffs, the decree passed therein can neither preclude the plaintiffs from instituting present suit nor … have filed suit to claim relief's against the defendants in relation to their acts of infringement of registered trade marks of the plaintiffs with the Registrar of Trade Marks in Mumbai; and acts of passing off, acts likely

G.M. Pens International Pvt. Limited by its Company Secretary Chennai ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property

for any costs. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Order IV Rule 1 Order VII Rule 1, Rule 2 Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 142 Suit for declaration Plaintiff sought for declaration, that threats issued by Defendant through their legal notice is unjustified

The Chartered Institute of Taxation vs.institute of Chartered Tax Advi ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

Vasant Kung, New Delhi-110070, etc. within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.” 2. Section 142 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, invoking which the suit has been filed, is as under: “142. Groundless threats of legal proceedings.- (1) Where

Lupin Ltd. and Another Vs. Johnson and Johnson and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

and the Designs Act there is no provision similar to the provision contained in Section 31(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. This is one more instance to show that the legislature did not intend that the question of validity … held by the Supreme Court in Corn Products Refining Company vs. Shangrila Food Products Limited (AIR 1960 SC 142). The defendant also pointed out that the plaintiff had filed a suit in the Madras High Court in

Neon Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Themis Medicare Ltd. and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

Ltd. in 1956. This is no defence at all. It is immediately defeated by Section 28(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (“the Act”): “28. Rights conferred by registration.- (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the registration … that common feature acquires any legitimacy (Corn Products Refining Co. v Shangrila Food Products Ltd., AIR 1960 SC 142, para 13).Dr. Tulzapurkar relies on the “FLOWSTACKA” Trade Mark case (1968) 3 RPC 66 at p. 73): “The

Sms Formulations Private Limited and Another Vs. Sahib Singh Agencies ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

original is also without any substance. The learned counsel relying on sub-section (3) of section 28 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 submits that as long as the trademark is registered, the person in whose favour it is registered has … counsel relies on the following judgments. Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd., AIR 1960 SC 142; Ultra Tech Cement Limited v. Alaknanda Cement Pvt.Ltd. and Anr., 2011 (5) Bom.C.R. 588; CadilaHealth Care Ltd. v.

Castrol Limited vs Sanjay Sonavane and Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

in favour of the Plaintiff, and against the Defendant:a. An order for declaration under Section 142 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, that the Plaintiff’s 3X Marks, including do not infringe the Defendant’s rights in the Defendant’s 3P Marks, including

Elofic Industries Limited & Anr vs.mobis India Limited and Anr

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

infringement by the plaintiffs of the trade mark of the defendants is purportedly under Section 142 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999; (ii) that however, the defendants have not meted out any threats to the plaintiffs, by means of circulars,

Pfizer Products Inc. Vs. Rajesh Chopra and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trademarks Act, 1999 - Sections 2(1), 2(2), 30(2), 31, 32, 34, 37, 38, 38(2), 47, 47(1), 124, 124(1) and 124(5); Trademark and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2(2), 18, 46, 46(1), 46(3), 47, 107, 111, 111(1) and 111(5); Trade Marks Registration Act, 1875 - Sections 12(3); Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Sections 17B; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 20 - Order 7, Rules 10 and 11 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : LC2007(2)323; 2007(35)PTC59(Del)

their plea of the invalidity of the registration of the mark of the Defendant. Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 is similar to the Section 111 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Under the Trade and … alleged by him.Reliance can also be placed on Patel Field Marshal Agencies v. P.M. Diesels Ltd. 1999 IPLR 142 : 1999 (19) PTC 718 where it was held that if the proceedings are not pending and the