Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.23 seconds)
Astrazeneca Uk Limited And Anr. vs Orchid Chemicals And Pharmaceuticals ... on 15 February, 2007
cites
Section 124 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Cadila Laboratories Ltd. And Anr. vs Dabur India Limited on 31 March, 1997
Similarly, in the other decision namely, Cadila Laboratories v. Dabur India Limited (supra) it was held that there is no possibility of 'Mexate' being pronounced and read as 'Zexate'. It was also laid down that meticulous comparison of words, letter by letter and syllable by syllable, is not necessary and phonetic or visual similarity of the marks must be considered.
Section 124 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Trade And Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 32 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Cadila Healthcare Limited vs Cadila Pharmaceuticals Limited on 26 March, 2001
In the said decision, the following principles were laid down and peculiar features were highlighted: