Trade Marks - Judgment Search Results

Registrar of Trade Marks Thr Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks vs.sonik ...

Court: Delhi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.R.P. No.146/2015 & CM No.21927/2015 (for stay) REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC and Ms. Anumita Chandra, Adv. versus KAPOOR SAWS MANUFACTURING CO & … Kapoor and Mr. Kapil Kumar, Advs. for R-3&4. AND C.R.P. No.29/2017 & CM No.5066/2017 (for stay) REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS THR DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC and Ms. Anumita Chandra, Adv.

Registrar of Trade Marks vs.kapoor Saws Manufacturing Co & Ors

Court: Delhi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.R.P. No.146/2015 & CM No.21927/2015 (for stay) REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC and Ms. Anumita Chandra, Adv. versus KAPOOR SAWS MANUFACTURING CO & … Kapoor and Mr. Kapil Kumar, Advs. for R-3&4. AND C.R.P. No.29/2017 & CM No.5066/2017 (for stay) REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS THR DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC and Ms. Anumita Chandra, Adv.

Hugo Boss Trade Mark Management Gmbh & Co. Kg vs.ms. Sheeta Sabharwal ...

Court: Delhi

is reproduced hereinbelow:-"CS (COMM) 1236/2018 Page 1 of 11 “A. B. Pass a decree of declaration that the trade marks BOSS, HUGO BOSS and BOSS formative/family of marks of the Plaintiff are well-known trade marks. The Defendant, their … declaration that the trade marks BOSS, HUGO BOSS and BOSS formative/family of marks of the Plaintiff are well-known trade marks. The Defendant, their partners, officers, employees, retailers, agents, distributors, suppliers, affiliates, subsidiaries, franchisees, representatives and assigns be restrained

Registrar of Trade Marks Vs. Hamdard National Foundation (India)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR1980Delhi180; 17(1980)DLT521; 1980RLR514

against the order of the learned single judge by which heset aside the order of the Registrar of Trade Marks and allowed the application of the respondent to have their trade mark consisting of the word(SAFIi) registered in … 6 of the Act requires the maintenance of a Register ofTrade Mark wherein shall be entered all registered Trade Marks. Section 7 of the Act says that the register shall be divided in two parts called respectively part

Patent and Trade Mark Agencies Employees Union Vs. William Frederic De ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1964Cal80

the Institute of Trade Mark Agents, London and the petitioners are registered Trade Mark Agents under the Indian Trade Marks Act 1940 and Rules made thereunder. They claim to be fully conversant with the laws and practice relating … 1940 and Rules made thereunder. They claim to be fully conversant with the laws and practice relating to Trade Marks and to be fit in other respects to practice as Trade Mark Agents. According to the petitioners their

Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1999SC22; JT1998(7)SC243; 1998(5)SCALE655; (1998)8SCC1; [1998]Supp2SCR359; MANU/SC/0664/1998; AIR 1998 SC 22

started the gyrating movement by applying for registration of their Trade Mark 'WHIRLPOOL' to the Registrar of the Trade Marks under the Trade Marks Act, 1940, which has since been replaced by the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, … by applying for registration of their Trade Mark 'WHIRLPOOL' to the Registrar of the Trade Marks under the Trade Marks Act, 1940, which has since been replaced by the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 19S8 and which for

S.S. White Burs Inc. 1145, Towbin Avenue, Lakewood, New Jersey, Usa vs ...

Court: Delhi

(COMM.IPD-TM) 448/2022 S.S. WHITE BURS INC. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Balaji Subramanian and Mr. Akash Kundu, Advocates.versusTHE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS, & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Balendu Shekhar, CGSC with Mr. Krishna Chaitanya, Mr. Rajkumar Maurya and Mr. Divyansh, … Class 5 and Class 10, on 25.07.2013 and that it had already been accepted and advertised in the Trade Marks Journal dated 11.03.2013; by that time, the limitation period for filing opposition had expired. It is stated that

Mankind Pharma Limited vs Registrar of Trade Marks

Court: Delhi

DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Judgment delivered on: 09.01.2026+ C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 13/2025 & I.A. 7045/2025MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED .....AppellantVersusTHE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS .....RespondentAdvocates who appeared in this caseFor the Appellant : Mr. Hemant Daswani and Ms. Saumya Bajpai, Advocates.For the … THE APPELLANT:8. The learned Counsel for the Appellant made the following submissions:8.1 The Appellant has over 280 registered Trade Marks, out of which 210 Marks are registered in Class 5, wherein the word ‘KIND’ forms part of the

Karan Rathore vs Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Court: Delhi

DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Judgment delivered on: 17.01.2026 + C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 23/2024 & I.A. 9027/2024 KARAN RATHORE .....AppellantversusREGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS & ANR. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellant : Mr. Kunal Khanna, Mr. Vishal … TEJAS KARIAJUDGMENTTEJAS KARIA, J1. The present Appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (“Act”) assailing the order dated 14.03.2024 Signature Not Verified C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 23/2024 Page 1 of 14(“Impugned Order”)

Coldsmiths Retail Services Private Limited vs Registrar of Trade Marks

Court: Delhi

on: 12.02.2026Judgment delivered on: 17.02.2026W.P.(C)-IPD 37/2025, CM 162/2025 & CM 164/2025 COLDSMITHS RETAIL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED .....PetitionerversusREGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS .....Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Senior Advocate with Ms. … the petitioner’s trademarks bearing registration nos.1214096, 1214098, 1214099, 1214100, 1214102, 1214103, 1214104 & 1214105 from the Register of Trade Marks on the ground of non-renewal of the registration. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondent to