Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (1.24 seconds)
Documents citing Greaves Cotton Limited vs Mr. Mohammad Rafi & Ors. on 3 June, 2011

Minda Spectrum Advisory Limited & Ors. vs Minda Oils India Pvt Ltd & Ors. on 20 September, 2022

"33. The defendant no. 2 in its written statement claims that the word RATHI is a common word and that the name was adopted by them because the great grandfather of the promoter/director of the defendant no. 2 was a resident of Rathi Vas village in Haryana. However no evidence has been placed on record to prove the said contention. Further, applying the ratio in the Greaves Cotton Case (supra), the defendants' use of the word 'GOLDEN' before the mark of the plaintiff 'RATHI' does not entitle them to use the impugned mark. The plaintiff's mark 'RATHI' is the essential part of their registered trademark and has been in use since the year 1980 as proved in Issues No. 1 and 2. Further, it is also seen from the newspaper clippings of the advertisements of the plaintiff's products placed on record, that they sell the products under the trademark 'RATHI' along with suffixes like Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 51/2022 Page 53 of 59 Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KUMAR Signing Date:22.09.2022 19:23:20 'TOR' and 'THERMEX', thus bearing the marks 'RATHI TOR' and 'RATHI THERMEX'. Furthermore, it is stated by defendant no. 2 in its written statement that the plaintiffs are also selling their products under the names 'RATHI EUROTEM' and 'RATHI PRAGATI'. Therefore it is clear to me that the word 'RATHI' forms an essential part of the plaintiff's trademark and thus, the defendants do not have the right to use the said word with any suffixes or prefixes. Issue No. 7 is decided in favour of the plaintiff."
Delhi High Court Cites 60 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document

Vinita Gupta vs Amit Arora on 28 September, 2022

In Greaves Cotton Limited v. Mr. Mohammad Rafi & Ors., 2011 SCC OnLine Del 2596, this Court held that neither deletion of a part of a registered trademark nor the prefix or suffix of another word to it would validate the use of a trademark by an unlicensed user, as this would not even be in the interest of a consumer who would buy the product under an impression that both products emanate from the same source, more particularly, where the quality of the product is different.
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document

Subhash Chand Bansal vs Khadim???S And Anr. on 22 August, 2012

14. I had the occasion to consider somewhat similar issue in Greaves Cotton Ltd. v Mohamamd Rafi & Ors. [2011(46) PTC 468(Del.)]. In that case, the plaintiff was the registered proprietor of the trademark „GREAVES‟ which was also being used by it as a part of its corporate name. Defendant no.1 before this Court had applied for registration of the trademark "GREAVES INDIA". Holding that the plaintiff was entitled to permanent injunction against use of the impugned mark, this Court, inter alia, held as under:
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 2 - V K Jain - Full Document

Rajesh Rathi & Ors. vs Golden Rathi Star Industries Ltd. & Anr. on 13 September, 2013

31. The defendant no.1 in its written statement claims that the word RATHI is a common word and that the name was adopted by them because the great grandfather of the promoter/director of the defendant no.1 was a resident of Rathi Vas village in Haryana. However no evidence has been placed on record to prove the said contention. Further, applying the ratio in the Greaves Cotton Case (supra), the defendants‟ use of the word „GOLDEN‟ before the mark of the plaintiff „RATHI‟ does not entitle them to use the impugned mark. The plaintiff‟s mark „RATHI‟ is the essential part of their registered trademark and has been in use since the year 1975 as established in Issues No. 1 and 2. Further, it is also seen from the newspaper clippings of the advertisements of the plaintiff‟s products placed on record, that they sell the products under the trademark „RATHI‟ along with suffixes like „TOR‟ and „THERMEX‟ thus bearing the marks „RATHI TOR‟ and „RATHI THERMEX‟. Furthermore, it is stated by defendant no.2 in its written statement that the plaintiffs are also selling their products under the names „RATHI EUROTEM‟ and „RATHI PRAGATI‟. Therefore it is clear to me that the word „RATHI‟ forms an essential part of the plaintiff‟s trademark and thus, the defendants do not have the right to use the said word with any suffixes or prefixes. Issue No.7 is decided in favour of the plaintiff.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - M L Mehta - Full Document

Prem Ratan Rathi & Ors. vs Ashish Iron Trading Co. & Anr. on 13 September, 2013

33. The defendant no.2 in its written statement claims that the word RATHI is a common word and that the name was adopted by them because the great grandfather of the promoter/director of the defendant no.2 was a resident of Rathi Vas village in Haryana. However no evidence has been placed on record to prove the said contention. Further, applying the ratio in the Greaves Cotton Case (supra), the defendants‟ use of the word „GOLDEN‟ before the mark of the plaintiff „RATHI‟ does not entitle them to use the impugned mark. The plaintiff‟s mark „RATHI‟ is the essential part of their registered trademark and has been in use since the year 1980 as proved in Issues No. 1 and 2. Further, it is also seen from the newspaper clippings of the advertisements of the plaintiff‟s products placed on record, that they C.S. (O.S.) Nos. 1383/2005 Page 20 of 26 sell the products under the trademark „RATHI‟ along with suffixes like „TOR‟ and „THERMEX‟, thus bearing the marks „RATHI TOR‟ and „RATHI THERMEX‟. Furthermore, it is stated by defendant no.2 in its written statement that the plaintiffs are also selling their products under the names „RATHI EUROTEM‟ and „RATHI PRAGATI‟. Therefore it is clear to me that the word „RATHI‟ forms an essential part of the plaintiff‟s trademark and thus, the defendants do not have the right to use the said word with any suffixes or prefixes. Issue No.7 is decided in favour of the plaintiff.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - M L Mehta - Full Document
1   2 3 Next