adoption of the identical mark "TRACKON" which is an arbitrary
mark. He submits that there was no search conducted by the
Defendant ... trademark "TRACKON" coined by the Plaintiff is an arbitrary
mark which is an inherently distinctive mark and by reason of the
continuous
trade mark application, the Plaintiff's trade mark 'RACIRAFT' was
not cited as conflicting mark. The application suffers from from delay ... Plaintiff's registered mark is arbitrary coined word and the impugned
mark is visually, structurally, aurally and phonetically similar to the
registered mark
marking system introduced vide
Corrigendum-III, 45 marks plus 5 marks (totaling 50 marks) are
reserved for subjective analysis, thereby leaving room for arbitrariness ... together carried only 40 marks, which has been now
been increased to 50 marks. There is reduction in maximum marks
against the attribute of work
marking system introduced vide
Corrigendum-III, 45 marks plus 5 marks (totaling 50 marks) are
reserved for subjective analysis, thereby leaving room for arbitrariness ... together carried only 40 marks, which has been now
been increased to 50 marks. There is reduction in maximum marks
against the attribute of work
marking system introduced vide
Corrigendum-III, 45 marks plus 5 marks (totaling 50 marks) are
reserved for subjective analysis, thereby leaving room for arbitrariness ... together carried only 40 marks, which has been now
been increased to 50 marks. There is reduction in maximum marks
against the attribute of work
marking system introduced vide
Corrigendum-III, 45 marks plus 5 marks (totaling 50 marks) are
reserved for subjective analysis, thereby leaving room for arbitrariness ... together carried only 40 marks, which has been now
been increased to 50 marks. There is reduction in maximum marks
against the attribute of work
prior user of the registered mark 'HANS CHAAP' since 1994 and that
the mark is arbitrary mark. He submits that ... Trade Marks Act, 1999,
the Petitioner's mark ought to have been cited by the Trade Marks
Registry as conflicting mark. The Petitioner
merit, the process of evaluation
cannot be considered to be arbitrary unless marks allotted for a
particular facet is on the face of it excessive ... marks for viva
voce and 20 marks for general knowledge out of 100 marks must be
held to be on the face of it arbitrary
merit, the process of evaluation
cannot be considered to be arbitrary unless marks allotted for a
particular facet is on the face of it excessive ... marks for viva
voce and 20 marks for general knowledge out of 100 marks must be
held to be on the face of it arbitrary
regards the allegation regarding arbitrariness in scaling
down the marks of the petitioner, it was submitted that the process of
scaling down was logical ... cannot be said that the scaling down itself was arbitrary.
The petitioner obtained 174 marks out of 200 in Electronics subject
and it was scaled
