Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (1.43 seconds)

New Balance Athletics Inc. vs New Balance Immigration Private ... on 12 October, 2022

In this context, I may also allude to a judgment of this Court in Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors. v. Mr. Vinod Kumar & Ors., 2011 SCC OnLine Del 1180, where the registered trademark of the Plaintiff was VOLVO for goods including buses, cars, automobile parts etc. and a claim for infringement and passing off was laid against the Defendant who was using the mark VOLVO for ice creams. In the said case, the Defendant was not the registered proprietor of the trademark VOLVO in respect of ice creams. Court observed that Plaintiff has been able to make out a prima facie case, being a registered proprietor of the trademark and trade name in respect of various categories of goods. It is established that the word VOLVO was not generic and over a period of time starting from 1915 all over the world and from 1975 in India at least has attained certain amount of distinctiveness and reputation which distinguishes it from the rest and, therefore, Defendant cannot be permitted to infringe or dilute the mark in terms of Section 29(4)(c) of the Act even for dissimilar products namely, ice cream.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document
1