Skip to content


Mark - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: mark Year: 2008 Page 1 of about 310 results (0.061 seconds)
Aug 08 2008 (TRI)

Bawa Jagmohan Singh and Others Verus the Registrar of Trade Marks and ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Aug-08-2008

..... recorded as subsequent proprietors in respect of the registered trade marks under nos 223079 223400 227794 238239 248562 251489 251470 ..... recordal of their names as subsequent proprietors of registered trade marks under nos 223079 223400 227794 238239 248562 251489 251470 ..... 139 of 2002 against the appellants alleging infringement of trade marks the high court directed the parties to appear before .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 19 2008 (TRI)

Pidilite Industries Limited and the Registrar of Trade Marks and Anoth ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Mar-19-2008

..... the appellant has also obtained copyright registration of the several artistic works containing the trade mark fevicol the prefix fevi and the device of two elephants under the relevant ..... honestly invented coined without any reference to others a fanciful inherently distinctive and different trade mark fevidip for use upon and in relation to medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations and made .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 01 2008 (TRI)

Shyam Sundar Sharma and Another Vs. the Registrar of Trade Marks and O ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: May-01-2008

..... confusion being caused as there is no deceptive similarity between the two marks here the mark is a composite mark consisting of geographical name it may be registered upon proving distinctiveness if ..... appellant were successful in obtaining the copy right registration certificate the trade mark being a composite label mark was erroneously not considered by the registrar while passing the order the .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 28 2008 (TRI)

Shri Parshotam Rai Vs. the Assistantregistrar of Trade Marks and Anoth ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Oct-28-2008

..... no way affected by the appellants use of the impugned mark the mark need not be refused registration was contended by the ..... the second respondents are the registered proprietors of the trade marks under various classes as early as 1962 ii second respondents ..... in support of opposition filed before the registrar of trade marks learned counsel further submitted that the assistant registrar had considered .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 15 2008 (TRI)

A. P. Selvarajan Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks and Another

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Sep-15-2008

..... its reply affidavit along with documents wherein the applicant has reiterated that the two marks being identical and registered without any geographical limitation though not admitted the plea of ..... un sustainable the respondent no 2 has conveniently forgotten that use of phonetically identical mark is inevitable to cause or likely to cause confusion and deception the impugned registration .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 01 2008 (TRI)

M/S Maruti Dhoop Agency Vs. Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks and Anothe ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Aug-01-2008

..... recognised that in deciding a question of similarity between two marks the marks have to be considered as a whole we have to ..... set down for hearing and the learned deputy registrar of trade marks had passed an order allowing the opposition and rejecting the ..... contentions in the counter statement filed by them before the trade marks registry the appellant also pointed to the ground wherein they had .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 19 2008 (TRI)

Amit R. Trivedi, Trading as M/S. Active Health Care Vs. Assistant Regi ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Mar-19-2008

..... application to be advertised before acceptance or issued cross notices to the proprietors of conflicting mark found at the time of examination of application to ascertain their interest in opposing ..... are set aside appeals allowed and remand the matters to the assistant registrar of trade marks ahmedabad with direction to decide expeditiously the applications in accordance with law however there .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 19 2008 (TRI)

Amit R. Trivedi Vs. Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks and Another

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Mar-19-2008

..... obtaining permission from the drug controller have started manufacturing and marketing medicinal preparation under the mark seren the assistant registrar finally heard the counsel for the appellant on 18 8 ..... appear to be phonetically and structurally identical or similar in the present case the conflicting marks seren and serene are patently identical phonetically as well as structurally in view of .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 08 2008 (TRI)

Volkswagen Ag Vs. the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Aug-08-2008

..... appellants manufactured goods internationally for decades the goods and services covered under the appellants trade mark will be applied only to the appellants products namely automobiles and the same will ..... examiner of trademarks having accepted the appellants written submission with regard to the cited marks could not have rejected the same submission and sustained the objection under section 11 .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 05 2008 (TRI)

Elgi Ultra Industries Limited Vs. the Assistant Registrar of Trade Mar ...

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Decided on: Sep-05-2008

..... the applicant appellant to satisfy the registrar of trade marks that the mark is distinctive or capable of distinguishing its goods ..... advertisements for promoting its goods under the aforesaid trade mark a few copies of such advertisements were filed along ..... registration obviously the applicant appellant cannot prove that as the mark has not acquired distinctiveness before the date of application .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

Sign-up to get more results

Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.

Start Free Trial

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //