Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

N. Ranga Rao And Sons Private Ltd. vs Shree Balaji Associates on 22 October, 2018

Bench: Rohinton Fali Nariman, S. Abdul Nazeer

     ITEM NO.35                              COURT NO.8                 SECTION XII

                                  S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                                          RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                  No.26979/2018

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-06-2018
     in WP No. 12531/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at
     Madras)

     N. RANGA RAO AND SONS PRIVATE LTD.                                  Petitioner(s)

                                                    VERSUS

     SHREE BALAJI ASSOCIATES & ANR.                                      Respondent(s)

     (With appln.(s) for clarification/direction and interim relief)

     Date : 22-10-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER

     For Petitioner(s)                Mr.   Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.
                                      Mr.   Pratap Venugopal, Adv.
                                      Mr.   Rahul Unnikrishnan, Adv.
                                      Ms.   Niharika, Adv.
                                      Ms.   Remya Raj, Adv.
                                      for   M/s. K J John And Co.

     For Respondent(s)


                               UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                O R D E R

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The special leave petition is dismissed, except that the finding of the Division Bench of the petitioner not being a ‘well known mark’ within the meaning of Section 11(6) of the Trade Mark Act, 1999, will not bind in any other case as the Division Bench is not correct in stating that no evidence Signature Not Verified was produced in this behalf.

Digitally signed by
CHETAN KUMAR
Date: 2018.10.23
17:32:38 IST
Reason:




                            (Chetan Kumar)                   (Tapan Kumar Chakraborty)
                             A.R.-cum-P.S.                        Court Master