Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 40 (2.27 seconds)
Documents citing Kellogg Company vs Pravin Kumar Bhadabhai And Another on 15 February, 1996

Vimal Dairy Limited vs Gujarat Tea Depot Company on 1 March, 2021

There is force in the contention of learned counsel for the plaintiff that the dictum in Kellogg Company's case (supra) to the extent it relied upon Schweppes Ld.'s case (supra) would not hold good in view of the subsequent development of law in M/s. S.M. Dyechem Ltd.'s case (supra) and the review thereof in Cadila Health Care Ltd.'s case (supra), the Apex Court while relying upon the observations in Schweppes Ld.'s case (supra) observed that if the customer does not distinguish the characteristics of the two packings, then he is not a customer whose view can properly be regarded by the Court.
Gujarat High Court Cites 55 - Cited by 2 - A Joshi - Full Document

Vimal Dairy Limited vs Gujarat Tea Depot Company on 1 March, 2021

There is force in the contention of learned counsel for the plaintiff that the dictum in Kellogg Company's case (supra) to the extent it relied upon Schweppes Ld.'s case (supra) would not hold good in view of the subsequent development of law in M/s. S.M. Dyechem Ltd.'s case (supra) and the review thereof in Cadila Health Care Ltd.'s case (supra), the Apex Court while relying upon the observations in Schweppes Ld.'s case (supra) observed that if the customer does not distinguish the characteristics of the two packings, then he is not a customer whose view can properly be regarded by the Court.
Gujarat High Court Cites 55 - Cited by 0 - A Joshi - Full Document

Cadbury Ltd. And 2 vs Itc Ltd. And 1 on 20 July, 2005

3. Factors (c) (d) and (e) can be considered together as the same are closed connected. The goods in respect of which the labels are used are confectionary items, being chocolate eclairs worth Re. 1/- each, which are consumed mostly by children, belonging to all the strata of society, whether rich or poor and whether literate or illiterate. Hence, the purchasers of these goods belong to different classes, but mostly comprising of children who cannot be expected to exercise a very high degree of care and caution in purchasing these goods. A child would generally go by the image he carries of a certain product, and considering the similarities between the two products, there is all likelihood that he would not be in position to make out the difference, if the defendants' goods are passed off as that of the plaintiffs'. Both the products are targeted at the same consumers/customers, who could be both villagers and towns-folk, literate and illiterate, children and adults and both are sold through the same trade channels. Hence, degree of care that would be exercised by the class of purchasers who are likely to buy these goods would be the common man wherein the principle of imperfect recollection would apply with full force. The decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Kellogg's (supra) cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case, as in the said case the Court had categorically found that the persons who go to purchase 'Kelloggs' Corn Flakes belong to the middle class and above who are fairly educated in English and able to distinguish 'Kelloggs' and what is not 'Kelloggs'; which cannot be said so in the facts of the present case.
Gujarat High Court Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sanjay Kapur & Anr. vs Dev Agri Farms Pvt Ltd on 28 February, 2014

30. Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff has strenuously urged that even otherwise the judgment in Kellogg Company vs. Pravin Kumar Bhadabhai & Anr. (supra) is no longer a good law and that this was noted by this Court in the case of N. Ranga Rao and Sons versus Anil Garg and Ors., 2006 (32) PTC 15. However, I need not go into this submission in view of the fact that in my view the Kellogg‟s judgment was made based on the facts that the trade dress of the defendant was entirely different from the trade dress of the plaintiff and there was absolutely no scope for confusion.
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 2 - J Nath - Full Document

Needle Industries (India) Limited And ... vs Virumal Parveen Kumar on 29 March, 2000

12. In reply to the contentions of the plaintiff that the size and the dimensions of the defendants card is identical to that of the Pony card of the plaintiffs and the card of the defendant is identical to the colour combination Scheme of the Pony card of plaintiff No.1 and printed matter on the defendants card is identical in placement and content to the corresponding features of the Pony card of plaintiff No.1, it is submitted by Mr.Aggarwal that colour scheme of silver gray and orange was common to trade and no one could claim its exclusive user and in any case the defendant was not using the trade mark Pony or any other trade mark which may be identical and/or deceptively similar to the registered trade mark of the plaintiffs. It is submitted by him that the defendants are using the trade mark/label of V.R. with the device of a swan using numerals "555" on the card which are entirely different from the card of the plaintiff. It is, therefore, submitted by Mr.Aggarwal that the Pony card of the plaintiff and the swan card of the defendant are totally different from each other and there cannot be any confusion in the mind of any person who is the fasteners from the market. He places reliance upon the judgment Kellogg Company Vs. Pravin Kumar Bhadabhai, 1996 PTC 187.
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 1 - S K Mahajan - Full Document

Pataka Biri Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs S.N. Biri Factory And Anr. on 23 March, 2004

(v) 1996, PTC, page 187, Kellogg & Company v. Pravin Kumar : In this case two parties were manufacturer and seller of corn flakes. The plaintiff/petitioner alleged that they copied the design and label of the Kellogg Corn Flakes and as such there had been a case of infringement. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court rejected such plea on the ground that even though the get up was similar but different names Kellogg and Aims Aristo displayed, make all the difference and as such that was not a fit case for interference.
Calcutta High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 2 - A K Banerjee - Full Document

Colgate Palmolive Company And Anr. vs Anchor Health And Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. on 29 October, 2003

15. While canvassing the aforesaid proposition of law, Mr. Anand has placed reliance upon a decision of Division Bench of this Court in Kellogg Company v. Pravin Kumar Bhadabhai 1996 PTC (16). In this case the appellant was selling Corn Flakes with carton which described the cartons as Kellogg's CORN FLAKES(the original and the best). The respondent was also selling corn flakes using a carton more or less similar in size but with the title "AIMS ARISTO CORN FLAKES" written just at the place where appellant displayed the words 'Kellogg's CORN FLAKES. The grievance of the appellant was that carton of the respondent was having substantial deceptive similarities and that these goods are bound to cause confusion amongst the customeRs. Some of the similarities pointed out by the appellant as well as dis-similarities pointed out by the court were as under:-
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 43 - J D Kapoor - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next