Cosmetic - Judgment Search Results

Mehra Cosmetics vs.ram Kumar Gulati & Ors.

Court: Delhi

word „CHEF‟ in conjunction wit h the word „BLUE‟ in respect of White Petroleum Jelly or any other cosmetics or any other marks deceptively similar to the mark „CHIEF‟ of the plaintiff.38. IA No.6484/2016 is disposed of.39.

Maja Cosmetics & Anr vs.oasis Commercial Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Date of decision:6. h December, 2017 CS(COMM) 757/2016 & IA No.7613/2016 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1&2 CPC). MAJA COSMETICS & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Neeraj Grover, Ms. Kanika Bajaj, Mr. Aditya Singh, Ms. Mehak and Ms.

Argus Cosmetics Limited vs.rameshchandra R Pandey & Ors

Court: Delhi

$~2 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 1147/2016 ARGUS COSMETICS LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Saurabh Srivastava, Mr. Ranjeet and Mr. Vaarish Singh Sidhu Sawlani, Advs. Versus RAMESHCHANDRA

Mehra Cosmetics vs.ram Kumar Gulati & Ors.

Court: Delhi

Date of decision:1. t November, 2019. CS(COMM) 699/2018, IA No.3814/2017(u/O.XXXIX R-2A CPC) & IA No.5770/2019(u/O.III R-4(2) CPC) MEHRA COSMETICS ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Mohan Vidhani with Mr. Rahul Vidhani, Mr. Ashish Singh, Ms. Elisha Kumar & Mr.

Renee Cosmetics Private Limited, vs Ms. Rupali Sharma & Anr.

Court: Delhi

DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Judgment reserved on: 20.05.2026Judgment delivered on: 05.06.2026+ C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 107/2025 & I.A. 11431/2025 RENEE COSMETICS PRIVATE LIMITED .....PetitionerversusMS. RUPALI SHARMA & ANR. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners :

D.R. Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. J.R. Industries

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2008Bom122; 2008(2)ALLMR1; 2008(2)BomCR28; (2008)110BOMLR307; LC2008(1)203

goodwill, licence, assets and liabilities into a corporate entity. The First Plaintiff was initially known as Dhanvantrai Ramshankar Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. In pursuance of a certificate issued on 21st May 2002 by the Registrar of Companies, the

Coral Cosmetics Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009[16]STR371

V.C. Daga, J.1. The petitioners seek to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 131 and 132 of the Finance Act, 1999. By Section 131 of the Finance Act, Clause (xxviii) was inserted in Section 37(b) of...

Vov Cosmetics Private Limited and Others Vs. Union of India, Through G ...

Court: Mumbai

Act, 1956, directing the petitioner No.1 to change its name within three months by deleting the words "VOV COSMETIC" from its name. 3. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are the directors/promoters of petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.2 -

Kaivan Cosmetics Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)(108)ELT188Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The appellant manufactures talcum powder. It sells its entire production to M/s. Godrej Soaps Pvt. Ltd. Hence notice was issued proposing the assessable value of these goods to be the price at which they were...

British Cosmetics Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)LC470Tri(Delhi)

the thinner was used for dilution of nail polish and removal of nail polish, it was used for cosmetic purposes only and the thinner was a 'preparation for use in manicure and pedicure' classifiable under CET sub-heading