Confusing - Judgment Search Results

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

Court: Trademark

Reported in: (2005)(31)PTC275Reg

..... mark is banzo phonetically visually and structurally therefore the question of deception and likelihood of confusion from the use of the impugned trade mark banzo does not arise however the comparison ..... of the parties herein are totally different therefore there is no possibility of likelihood of confusion among the customers purchasing the opponent s goods 25 in the matter of an application .....

Chennai Hotel Saravana Bhavan and ors. Vs. Hotel Saravana Bhavan

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2005(4)ALD263; 2005(3)ALT789

..... see the similarity between two trademarks to determine whether there was likelihood of deception and confusion to a person of average intelligence and imperfect recollection overall structural similarity of product ..... of defendant was likely to cause confusion in the facts of the case it was held that the defendant infringing the .....

M.P.Jewellers Vs. New M.P. Jewellers Chawk Bazaar

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... in such circumstances the mark adopted by the respondent certainly would amount to deception and confusion and as such is prohibited for registration under section 11 a of the said act ..... trade name which incidentally becomes their trade mark also the similar names would definitely cause confusion hence the applicant has clearly established that the impugned mark has wrongly been registered by .....

Colgate Palmolive Co. Limited and anr. Vs. Mr. Patel and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(31)PTC583(Del)

..... are not persuaded by the three traditional arguments against protection the color depletion theory shade confusion and the functionality doctrine nor are we impressed by the argument that consistency and ..... marks when all the traditional requirements have been met will actually promote inconsistency and confusion proponents of the color depletion theory assert that there are only a few possible .....

M/S. the Welcome Foundation Limited, England Vs. M/S. Reliance Formula ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... assistant registrar of trade marks held that there will be no confusion or deception in the trade aggrieved by the same the ..... as the first respondent being pharmaceutical drugs for human consumption the confusion that would cause is hazardous the assistant registrar of trade ..... that the registration of their mark will not create any confusion or deception in the trade when the applicants marks were .....

Pandugula Vali Basha Vs. N. Mohammed Haris and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2005(4)ALT760

..... the plaintiffs trade mark plaintiffs enquiries revealed that the common man and the customer was confused it is difficult for an ordinary man to differentiate between the beedies of defendant and ..... the two names amritdhara and lakshmandhara is in our opinion likely to deceive or cause confusion we mustconsiderthe overall similarity of the two composite words amritdhara and lakshmandhara we do not .....

Preme Vs. Ambujakshan

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2006(1)KLT905

..... erroneous belief engendered by the defendant s misrepresentation to establish a likelihood of deception or confusion in an action for passing off where there has been no direct misrepresentation generally ..... connection with his business or services which already belongs to someone else it results in confusion and has propensity of diverting the customers and clients of someone else to himself .....

Prakash Glass and Rubber Works and anr. Vs. Hindustan Safety Glass Wor ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(2)CHN555,2007(34)PTC267(Cal)

..... which is calculated to deceive or likely to deceive and confuse members of the trade and consuming public to believe that ..... to determine whether there is likelihood of deception or causing confusion he further submitted that the mark of the petitioner appellant ..... tests for determining the question of likelihood of deception or confusion trade connection between different goods is another such test ex .....

The Enfield India Limited, Chennai Vs. Deepak Engineering Syndicate, R ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... trade channels of the appellant and hence there cannot be any confusion and therefore the prohibition contemplated under section 11 a was ..... trade marks has rightly held that there is absolutely no confusion or deception in both the marks hence there is absolutely ..... mark benz with respect to undergarments will lead to confusion in the market although the manufacturers of mercedes benz cars .....

Dang and Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)94ITD29(Delhi)

..... the rival contentions have been duly considered by me two confusions which neither of the learned members has tried to remove ..... an advance received towards purchase of certain properties the other confusion not so major is whether concept international and concept international ..... of the transaction therefore i am ignoring this confusion anyway amidst the confusion i have to make my way to agree .....