Intellectual Property - Judgment Search Results

Bayer Intellectual Property Gmbh & Anr vs.alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd

Court: Delhi

with Ms. Rajeshwari, Ms. Aparna Gaur, Mr. Tahir A.J.and Mr. Gajendra, Advs. for R-5. AND CS(COMM) No.1592/2016 BAYER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY GMBH & ANR ....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Archana Shanker, Mr. Aditya Gupta and Mr. Utkarsh Srivastava, … or for any purpose other than those mentioned in Section 107A.12. CS(COMM) No.1592/2016 has been filed by Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH and Bayer Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (both, also Bayer) to injunct Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (Alembic) from making, selling, distributing,

Bayer Intellectual Property Gmbh and Anr vs.symed Laboratories Ltd

Court: Delhi

OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h February, 2019 EX.P. 158/2016 & EA No.371/2015 (u/S151CPC) BAYER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY GMBH AND ANR ..... Decree Holders Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Nishchal Anand & Mr. Sanchith Shivakumar, Advs.

Bayer Intellectual Property Gmbh and Anr. Vs.alembic Pharmaceuticals L ...

Court: Delhi

OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. 10.2018 Pronounced on:22. 04.2019 RFA(OS)(COMM) 6/2017, CM Nos.17508/2017 & 32128-29/2017 BAYER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY GMBH & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Nishchal

Intellectual Property Attorneys Association vs.the Controller General ...

Court: Delhi

DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:16. h October, 2019 + W.P.(C) 3851/2019 & CM Appls. 17546/2019, 29362/2019 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION Through: Mr.C.M. Lall, Senior Advocate with and Mr.Rahul ........ Petitioner Ms.Nancy Roy Vidhani, Advocates Mr.Amarjit Singh

intellectual Property Attorneys Association Vs. Union of India and anr

Court: Delhi

DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h October, 2014. + W.P.(C) No.3679/2014 & CM No.7455/2014 (for stay) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. C.M. Lall, Adv., Ms. Prathiba M. Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mohan

Kalpaka Builders Private Limited vs Intellectual Property Appellate Bo ...

Court: Kerala

FLOOR, CASSAGRANTE BUILDING, DESHABHIMANI JUNCTION, KALOOR, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.M.V.SUNIT. BY ADV. SRI.BENOY K.KADAVAN RESPONDENTS:1 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY APPELLATE BOARD GUNA COMPLEX, ANNEXURE 1, 2ND FLOOR, 443, ANNASALAI, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI-600 018. 2 THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARKS … FOLLOWING:JUDGMENTDated this the 11th day of January, 2024The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P6 order of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, cancelling the trademark registration granted to the petitioner under No.1374072 in class 37 and remanding the

Allied Blenders and Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Intellectual Property App ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR2009Mad196

this order the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai. It was canvassed on behalf of the petitioner/appellant before the Appellate Board that in the … dismiss this writ petition, however, without any order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Intellectual Property Rights - Trademarks - Registration of trademark - Opposition to Registration - Power of Registrar of Trade Marks

Schering-plough Ltd. Vs. Intellectual Property Appellate Board and anr ...

Court: Chennai

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (in short Appellate Board). The Appellate Board dismissed the condonation petition by stating that the affidavit

Ammini Karnan Vs. Intellectual Property Appellate Board

Court: Chennai

Proprietrix Trading as M/s K.K.R. Modern Rice Mills Okkal Post, Kalady, Ernakulam, Kerala-683 550 .. Petitioner Vs 1. Intellectual Property Appellate Board, 2nd Floor, Annexure-I, Guna Complex, 443, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai-18 rep by it s Deputy Registrar … the trademark in favour of the applicant/third respondent.8. Aggrieved, in May 2005, an appeal was preferred before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, hereinafter referred to as "Appellate Board", by the applicant/third respondent. Meanwhile, a suit in O.S.No.3 of

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

Court: Mumbai

Petitioner challenges the order passed on 26th November 2012 by Respondent No.1. 2. By the impugned order, the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, (IPAB), has passed an order on Miscellaneous Petition Nos.232 and 233 of 2012 in the case … as rectification proceedings. 28. The Appellate Board, established by Section 83, falling in Chapter XI is styled as "Intellectual Property Appellate Board". It exercises the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on it by or under the Trade Marks