tablets since 1983, did not infringe the respondent/plaintiff's mark ‗Hajmola'. As a matter
of fact in this case, the appellant/defendant
products such as Dabur
Amla Hair Oil, Dabur Dental Care and Dabur Hajmola Candy over
the Doordarshan National Network, DD Metro, DD Madras
slight
difference of 'A'. In the pronunciation of
word HAJMOLA AND HAZMOL. There is
hardly any difference of note. HAJMOLA
is the plaintiff
slight
difference of 'A'. In the pronunciation of
word HAJMOLA AND HAZMOL.
There is hardly any difference of note.
HAJMOLA is the plaintiff
slight difference of 'A'. In the pronunciation of
word HAJMOLA AND HAZMOL. There is
Suit No. 174/08/01 21
hardly any difference ... note. HAJMOLA is the
plaintiff's trade mark. Hazmol is the trade mark
of the defendant except that the suffix
slight
difference of 'A'. In the pronunciation of
word HAJMOLA AND HAZMOL.
There is hardly any difference of note.
HAJMOLA is the plaintiff
slight
difference of 'A'. In the pronunciation of
word HAJMOLA AND HAZMOL. There
is hardly any difference of note.
HAJMOLA is the plaintiff
slight difference of 'A'. In the pronunciation of
word HAJMOLA AND HAZMOL. There is
hardly any difference of note. HAJMOLA is the
plaintiff
tablet each to her and her brother on the pretext of Hajmola
tablet and asked them to eat the same, but they refused and
said ... that it was not Hajmola tablet because it was bigger than
that.
DW2 has further stated that her mother started
feeling unwell and asked
Avail 25 were recovered and one plastic container of Hajmola candy
containing some tablets/ toffees of Hajmola candy was recovered from
accused Praveen