Advanced Search Results

Alaknanda Cement Private Limited. Vs. Ultratech Cement Limited

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Trade Mark

Acts : Trade Mark Act, 1999 - Section 17 (2), 17 (a) (b) (i) (ii), 29

specified in Class-19 of the Fourth Schedule of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 (`the Rules') framed under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (`The Act') and the same is valid and subsisting. 7 The plaintiff's contentions are as under :- (a) … The appellant-defendant also claims to be a Manufacturer of Cement. 3 Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Chagla relied upon Section 17 of the Trade Mark Act, 1999 and submitted that Section 17(2) carves out an exception. Relying upon Judgment

Cadbury India Limited and ors. Vs. Neeraj Food Products

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trademarks Act, 1999 - Sections 17, 18, 18(1), 18(4), 31, 27, 27(2), 28, 29 and 29(5); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 17; Copyright Act, 1957; Trademarks Act, 1940 - Sections 10; Civil Procedure Coce - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; Indian Penal Code

Reported in : 142(2007)DLT724; LC2007(2)269; 2007(35)PTC95(Del)

Penal Code Disclaimer does not affect those rights in any way.73. By virtue of Section 27 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, a person has been conferred a statutory right of protection of its registered trademark. At the same time … in the word 'GEMS' and that it has a composite registration in 'Cadbury Gems'. Consequently, by virtue of Section 17 of the Trademark Act, the plaintiff would have no exclusive right in a part of registered trademark. Mr.

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 … circle can constitute an essential feature of TELCO's mark is not a legally tenable proposition in view of Section 17 of the TM Act 1999.19. Section 17 of the TM Act 1999 provides that the registration of a

Three-n-products Private Limited Vs. Emami Limited

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 17, 17(1), 17(2), 27, 28, 29, 29(2) and 29(9); ;Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Section 131(1); ;Trade Marks Rules, 2002 - Rule 33

Reported in : 2008(4)CHN608,LC2008(3)319,2009(41)PTC689(Cal)

present action for infringement and passing off was launched.12. The plaintiff refers to the various provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 to say that it is exclusively entitled to the word mark 'Ayur' by virtue of the word being … 1999 Act repeatedly in asserting its exclusivity over the words 'Ayur' and 'Ayu'. The defendant has stressed on Section 17 of the 1999 Act to contest the plaintiff's claim of exclusivity over the word 'Ayur' and points to

Bhandari Products, a Proprietory Concern Vs. Giriraj Enterprises and a ...

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 27, 28, 28(3), 30 and 30(2); Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 51; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 6, Rule 17 - Order 39; Constitution of India - Article 227

Reported in : (2007)3GLR2427; LC2007(2)116; 2008(36)PTC558(Guj)

of 2005 in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad for passing off action under Section 27 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as well as infringement of Copyright Act particularly Section 51 of the … with the amendment application. In view of the same, the plaintiff filed amendment application under Order 6 Rule 17 on 7.8.2006 and in the said amendment application, the plaintiff has sought for amendment of the plaint by

Alaknanda Cement Private Limited. Vs. Ultratech Cement Limited.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

specified in Class-19 of the Fourth Schedule of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002 (`the Rules') framed under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (`The Act') and the same is valid and subsisting. 7. The plaintiff's contentions are as under :- (a) … The appellant-defendant also claims to be a Manufacturer of Cement. 3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Chagla relied upon Section 17 of the Trade Mark Act, 1999 and submitted that Section 17(2) carves out an exception. Relying upon Judgment

Mehboob Khan Vs. Firoz Qureshi and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

Blue' marks) is stayed for a period of three weeks from the date when this judgment is uploaded. Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 17, Section 29 Entitlement to Relief This is a motion for injunction and other reliefs in an action for

Vizag Profiles Ltd. Vs. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (Rinl), Popularl ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 17(2), 20(1), 21(1), 23(2), 33, 64, 66 and 73; Indian Trade Marks Act, 1940; Trade Marks Rules - Rules 47(1), 62(1), 131(1) and 138(1)

Reported in : 2009(5)ALT58

Notice of Opposition on 27-5-2005 under Sections 21(1), 64, 66, 73 and Rules 47(1), 131(1) and 138(1) of Trade Marks Act, 1999. The plaintiff became aware of the attempt to use the mark 'VIZAG' and symbol 'I' by the first … Registering authorities, they have published an advertisement in the Trade Marks Journal No. 1327 Supplement II January under Section 20(1) proviso as an advertisement before acceptance. On coming to know about the advertisement, the plaintiff filed Notice … a warning notice to the first defendant, followed by legal notice dt. 17-12-2004 calling upon the first defendant to withdraw their application under intimation to

Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited Vs. South Konkan Distille ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : MRTP

brief, are that this usage is an honest industrial practice within the meaning of Section 30(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999; secondly, that the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor not of TANGO as a trade mark but of TANGO … mark had led to TANGO being associated exclusively with the Plaintiff's products and no one else's. 10. Section 17(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 reads: "Sn.17 - Effect of registration of parts of a mark (1)

Archie Comic Publications, Inc. Vs. Purple Creations Pvt. Ltd. and ors ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 23(1) and 134(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 151 - Order 6, Rule 17 - Order 7, Rules 10 and 11

Reported in : LC2008(2)289; 2008(37)PTC279(Del)

Hon'ble Court has the jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the present suit under Section 134(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 as the plaintiff is carrying on its business in Delhi at least since 1979.4. The defendants filed the … had applied for registration of the 'ARCHIE and Heads' composite trademark/ label bearing the application No. 518483 on 17.10.1989 in Class 16 and the plaintiff has alleged that it has been extensively using the mark in India