Gopal Kishan Vs Union of India and Another
.... D'' and a device, where respondent No. 2 stated that it proposed to use the mark in respect of which registration was being sought. As noted by the learned Single Judge in para 8 of his order, the case of respondent No. 2 was that the mark ''STANDARD'' was being used by it since the year 1958 and it ...
Delhi High Court
Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dadi Balsara And Ors
.... on'ble High Court of Delhi and Form-1 specifically states that the applicant has to mention if there is any action pending in any court or before the Registrar of Trade Marks. i) The applicant is not a person aggrieved - The applicant had prior knowledge about the status and reputation of t ...
Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai Circuit Bench At New Delhi
Parshotam Rai, Trading As Sony Plastic Vs Assistant Registrar Of Trade Marks And Sony Kabushiki Kaisha Also Trading As Sony Corporation Service Through Their Advocates Lall Lahiri And Salhotra, Advocates Patent And Trade Mark Attorneys
.... lants had made any search in the Trade Marks Registry they would have definitely come across the second respondent's mark as it was in use since 1962. The counsel also pointed to page 14 of the impugned order that the impugned mark SONY was registered under application No. 397944 in class 18. The ...
Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai Circuit Bench At New Delhi
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha Vs P.B. Asrani And Ors.
.... affidavit of evidence filed in support of the opposition before the Trade Marks Registry in the opposition proceedings under appeal to show their sales turnover and the expenses incurred towards sales promotion and advertisements. The figures were in lakhs of Japanese Yen. 12. Learned Counse ...
Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai Circuit Bench At Mumbai
Hi-Tech Pipes Ltd. Vs Asian Mills Pvt. Ltd.
.... trades will almost always be a trade mark and it is always considered difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish between the trading business and a trade name (vide Reuter (R.J.) Co. v. Muhlens (1958) 70 R.P.C. 235. It is no doubt true that where the trade name of an individual business man is geo ...
Delhi High Court
Jindal Rolling Mills Ltd. Vs Ganesh Rolling Mills And Ors.
.... registration of impugned mark has been renewed. The petitioner in his rejoinder dated 21.2.1997 denied the averments of the respondents No. 1 and 3 in their reply. 4. The case came up for hearing before the Board on 12.8.2004 in its sitting held at New Delhi. Learned counsel Shri A.K. Goel ...
Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai Circuit Bench At New Delhi
Hanuman Mal Choradia Vs F.W. Woolworth Co. And Anr.
.... a producer having its own production units. She drew our attention to para 6 of the affidavit of Ms. Sheilagh M. Clarke wherein it has been stated:- "The trade mark WOOLWORTH was adopted as a trade mark and trading style by my company's founder and predecessor Frank Winfield Woolworth ...
Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai Circuit Bench At New Delhi
Kewal Krishan Kumar Vs Rudi Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd. and Another
.... not likely to remember the fine distinctions between a Vaishnavite Goddess and a Shivaite deity." 8. In this case, instead of phonetic similarity leading to confusion, there is a lot of phonetic difference between the words "Shakti" and "Shiv Shakti". There could not be any confusion as it could ...
Delhi High Court
R.S.K.V. Raghavan trading as R.S. Krishna and Co., Mayuram Vs G. R. Gopal and Co. and Others
.... n respect of Preparations made by him. But, a Perusal of the label which has been registered as his (appellants) trade mark would show that it contains not only the word ''Thennamarakkudi'' but also several other words and therefore the whole label containing the word ''Thennamarakkudi'' along with ...
Madras High Court
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
