Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 27 (1.42 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Wander Ltd. And Anr. vs Antox India P. Ltd. on 26 April, 1990
31. Trade mark is essentially adopted to advertise one's product
and to make it known to the purchaser. It attempts to portray the
nature and, if possible, the quality of the product and over a period
of time the mark may become popular. It is usually at that stage
that other people are tempted to pass off their products as that of
the original owner of the mark. That is why it is said that in a
passing-off action, the plaintiff's right is "against the conduct of the
defendant which leads to or is intended or calculated to lead to
deception. Passing-off is said to be a species of unfair trade
competition or of actionable unfair trading by which one person,
through deception, attempts to obtain an economic benefit of the
reputation which another has established for himself in a particular
29 DCNY 1915, 219 F 325.326
30 207 USPQ 504 (TTAB 1980)
31 169 USPQ 1 (2nd Cir 1971)
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM CS(COMM) 744/2023 Page 42 of 52
Signing Date:16.11.2023
14:52:59
trade or business. The action is regarded as an action for deceit".
[See Wander Ltd. v. Antox India (P) Ltd.]
Section 21 in THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 [Entire Act]
Ms. Yamini Manohar vs Mrs T K D Keerthi on 8 May, 2023
34. It is instructive, therefore, to examine the basis on which the
learned Single Judge, in his decision in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D.
Keerthi20, found the case to be one which contemplated urgent interim
20 (2023) 95 PTC 328
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM CS(COMM) 744/2023 Page 22 of 52
Signing Date:16.11.2023
14:52:59
relief and, therefore, justify dispensation with the requirement of pre-
institution mediation. Paras 17 to 19 of the judgment of the learned
Single Judge, which contain the reasons for his decision, read thus:
Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs Khandelwal Laboratories Ltd. on 27 September, 2005
In this context, Ms. Sahadeva also relies on my decision in Elyon
Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. v. Registrar of Trademarks 10 and para 5
of the judgment of the High Court of Bombay in Medley
Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. Khandelwal Laboratories Ltd11.
Schering Corporation & Ors. vs Alkem Laboratories Ltd. on 1 December, 2009
18. On the aspect of infringement, Ms. Sahadeva further cites the
judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Schering
Corporation v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd13. On the aspect of passing
off, she relies on para 35 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Cadila Health Care.
Zydus Wellness Products Limited vs Cipla Health Ltd & Anr. on 3 July, 2023
For the proposition that the likelihood of confusion of association
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM CS(COMM) 744/2023 Page 14 of 52
Signing Date:16.11.2023
14:52:59
cannot be said to be reduced in view of the category of consumers
targeted by the rival marks, Mr. Narula places reliance on my decision
in Zydus Wellness Products Ltd v. Cipla Health Ltd15 and para 32 of
my decision in Mankind Pharma Ltd v. Novakind Bio Sciences Pvt
Ltd16.
Mankind Pharma Limited vs Novakind Bio Sciences Private Limited on 7 August, 2023
For the proposition that the likelihood of confusion of association
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM CS(COMM) 744/2023 Page 14 of 52
Signing Date:16.11.2023
14:52:59
cannot be said to be reduced in view of the category of consumers
targeted by the rival marks, Mr. Narula places reliance on my decision
in Zydus Wellness Products Ltd v. Cipla Health Ltd15 and para 32 of
my decision in Mankind Pharma Ltd v. Novakind Bio Sciences Pvt
Ltd16.
Chandra Kishore Chaurasia vs R A Perfumery Works Private Limited on 27 October, 2022
29. A Division Bench of this Court, in Chandra Kishore
Chaurasia v. R.A. Perfumery Works Pvt Ltd19 , after noting the
decision in Patil Automation, held thus: