Trademark law exists to protect two distinct but related interests simultaneously. It protects the proprietor of a registered mark against the unauthorized use of that mark by others who would free-ride on the reputation and goodwill that the proprietor has built. And it protects consumers against confusion – against the risk that they will be […]
Trademark Infringement under Section 29 – A Complete Analysis Read More »
Delhi High Court | Suit No. 159 of 1999 Decided on 9 March 2001 Judge: Justice Mukul Mudgal Citation: 2001 PTC 432 (Del) | 90 (2001) DLT 659 | 2001 (58) DRJ 306 Background Tata Sons Limited is one of the oldest and largest business conglomerates in India. The company has been the registered proprietor
Delhi High Court | I.A. No. 10115 of 1998 in Suit No. 2469 of 1998 Decided on 19 February 1999 Judge: Dr. M.K. Sharma J. Background Yahoo Inc. is an American company that has been operating as a global Internet media service provider under the trademark and domain name “Yahoo!” since 1994. The domain name
Supreme Court of India | Civil Appeal Nos. 4767-4769 of 2001 Decided on 29 November 2017 Background P.M. Diesels Ltd. was the registered owner of three trademarks all carrying the words “Field Marshal.” The registrations dated back to 1964 and 1968 and covered the marks “Field Marshal,” “Field Marshal” in a specific lettering style and
Patel Field Marshal Agencies & Anr. v. P.M. Diesels Ltd. & Ors. Read More »
Bombay High Court | February 10, 2003 | 2004 (28) PTC 193 (Bom) S.J. Vazifdar, J. Background The trademark “M-Seal” has a long and well-documented history. It was first used in 1968 by Mahindra Van Wijk and Visser Ltd. in respect of epoxy resin compositions used for cementing cracks, holes and leaks in metal articles.
Pidilite Industries Ltd. vs. S.M. Associates & Ors. Read More »
The journey of a trademark application from the moment it is filed to the point at which it is accepted for advertisement is one of the most consequential phases in the entire registration process. It is during this period that the Trade Marks Registry scrutinizes the application against the requirements of the Trade Marks Act,
Trademark Examination in India – From Filing to Acceptance Read More »
Allahabad High Court | January 23, 1985 | AIR 1985 All 242 A. Banerji, J. Background Bata India Limited is one of India’s most iconic commercial names, having been associated with the manufacture and sale of footwear and related products since before the enactment of the Trade Marks Act, 1940. The name “Bata” derives from
Bata India Limited vs. Pyare Lal & Co., Meerut City & Ors. Read More »
The examination of a trademark application in India operates at two distinct levels. The first level, governed by Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, concerns the inherent qualities of the mark itself – whether it is distinctive, whether it is descriptive, whether it offends public policy. These are the absolute grounds and they
Relative Grounds for Refusal under Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 Read More »
Supreme Court of India | April 26, 1990 | 1990 Supp (1) SCC 727 M.N. Venkatachaliah, N.D. Ojha & J.S. Verma, JJ. Background Wander Ltd. was the registered proprietor of the trademark “Cal-De-Ce” in respect of vitaminsed Calcium Gluconate Tablets. In March 1986, Wander Ltd. entered into a manufacturing agreement with Antox India (P) Ltd.,
Bombay High Court | October 10, 1995 | Appeal from Order Nos. 1152, 1153 & 1154 of 1994 AIR 1996 Bom 149 Background The Kirloskar Group of Companies is one of India’s most storied industrial conglomerates, tracing its origins to 1888 when Laxmanrao Kashinath Kirloskar began a bicycle repair business in Belgaum. By 1920, the
Kirloskar Diesel Recon Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Kirloskar Proprietary Ltd. & Ors. Read More »