Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 33 (0.32 seconds)Section 56 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Limited vs Sami Khatib Of Mumbai on 8 April, 2011
In the case of Cadila Pharmaceuticals
Limited vs. Sami Khatib of Mumbai (supra), this Court in the context
of Section 56 of the Trade Marks Act held as follows:-
Om Prakash Berlia And Another vs Unit Trust Of India And Others (No. 2) on 6 August, 1982
The judgements in the cases of Om Prakash Berlia & Anr.
vs. Unit Trust of India & Ors. (supra), Pukh Raj Bumb vs. Jagannath
Atchut Naik & Ors. (supra) and CFMA Asset Reconstruction Pvt.
Ltd. vs. M/s. SAR Parivahan Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (supra), all pertained to
ordinary suits and not commercial suits placed for trial before
commercial courts as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts
Act, 2015 and the provisions of the CPC applicable to commercial
courts. The principles applicable to commercial suits were not subject
matter of consideration and hence, the said judgements can be of no
assistance to the defendant.
Section 28 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 35 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Pukh Raj Bumb vs Jagannath Atchut Naik on 14 October, 2014
The judgements in the cases of Om Prakash Berlia & Anr.
vs. Unit Trust of India & Ors. (supra), Pukh Raj Bumb vs. Jagannath
Atchut Naik & Ors. (supra) and CFMA Asset Reconstruction Pvt.
Ltd. vs. M/s. SAR Parivahan Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (supra), all pertained to
ordinary suits and not commercial suits placed for trial before
commercial courts as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts
Act, 2015 and the provisions of the CPC applicable to commercial
courts. The principles applicable to commercial suits were not subject
matter of consideration and hence, the said judgements can be of no
assistance to the defendant.