submitted that the trademark HAZZA is
similar in idea and it is deceptively similar to the trademark of
the respondent. He also pointed out that ... letter, 'L' in the
trademark LAZZA. The trademark HAZZA is phonetically,
visually and structurally is similar to the trademark LAZZA. The
respondent
products. It is further averred that by using the same, similar or
deceptively similar trademark by Defendants resulted in
misrepresentation made during the course ... restrainined
from using the trademark "DKM Fresh" and/or any other
trademark and logos deceptively and confusingly similar to
the registered marks
2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
undefined
proprietor, similarity of trademarks and public policy.
According to the plaintiff, such failure has resulted ... identical with or deceptively
similar to an earlier mark in respect of similar goods or
services, if such similarity is likely to cause confusion
structurally and phonetically has
deceptive similarity and substantially similar to the Appellant's
prior adopted used and registered trademark. It was therefore
constrained ... trade, a mark which a)
is identical with or similar to the registered trademark, b) is used
in relation to the goods or services which
similar to the
registered trademark, and (3) use of impugned trademark in
relation to goods or services, identical or similar to those for
which mark ... infringement of the registered trademark. If by any manner, a
registered trademark is infringed by a person, because of its
similarity to the registered trademark
even at the present time; therefore, the question
of similarity or deceptive similarity of the trademark does not arise for
consideration.
The evidence further establishes ... similarity of goods or services
covered by the trade mark; or
(b) its similarity to an earlier trade mark and the identity or similarity
using the offending
trademark ‘AAROGYA’ which are similar, deceptively similar and
identical to the plaintiff’s trademark ‘AROKYA’ or by using any other
trademark which ... similar, deceptively similar or identical to that of the
plaintiff’s trademark ‘AROKYA’ by manufacturing or selling or offering
for sale or in any manner
Trademark Application No. 4550705 filed by the Appellant, whereby
Respondent has refused registration of the trademark citing two
trademarks stated to be deceptively similar ... proscription to register a
trademark arises when the applied trademark because of its identity with an
earlier trademark and similarity of goods or services
refrain use of a person who has been
using any identical/similar trademark for a period of time prior to the date of
first ... Registrar has simply proceeded on the ground that the applied trademark
is similar to the cited trademark and the goods are also similar, completely
oblivious
registered
under No. 963813 in class 5 by use of deceptively similar trademark
AVASLIP or any mark identical or similar to Plaintiff’s registered
trademark ... pharmaceutical
preparations under the trademark AVASLIP or any other trademark that is
identical to and /or deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s trademark AVAS
