Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: concurrent user in Mind Gym Ltd. vs Mindgym Kids Library Pvt. Ltd. on 21 March, 2014Matching Fragments
18. In this view of the matter, I think that the balance of convenience would be in fav0uor of the plaintiffs, to ensure that by concurrent user, during the period of the trial, no other rights come into existence. In my view, it is very convenient, if the defendants are so minded, to adopt any other label that establishes a connection in the course of trade with respect to the footwear manufactured by them."
In view of the above said facts and circumstances, it is held that two marks and trade names MIND GYM visually, phonetically and structurally are identical as well as deceptively similar. The use of the same trade mark and corporate name by the defendant amounts to infringement of trade mark of the plaintiff. In case the defendant is allowed to use the same trade mark and trade name, there would be confusion and deception. Trade Name