F. Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. Ltd vs Geoffrey Manners & Co. Pvt. Ltd on 8 September, 1969
10. This method of approach is to start with the microscopic method of comparison with the marks placed side by side. Such approach has repeatedly been condemned in various decisions, F. Hoffmann v. Geoffrey Manners, , being one, where the Supreme Court rejected the contention that "Dropovit" and "Protovit" were likely to deceive or cause confusion. In the present matter, the Joint Registrar' s emphasis on the starling letter "C" in both the words, does not take into account the total phonetic dissimilarity between the 2 words, namely that the very same "C" is pronounced entirely differently in both the words, it is not the suffix that is the controlling sound. It is the disparate "COM" and the other as written) that is the controlling sound and it is that which makes all the difference. "The first syllable of a word mark is generally the most important". As there is a "tendency of person using the English language to slur the termination of words". (Kerly's Law of Trade Marks, 11th ED. Page 416). In Re; Bayer Products, (1947) 64 RPC 125, it was held that "Diasil" and "Alasil" were not deceptively similar or likely to cause confusion. Where the first two syllables are different, there is little likelihood of confusion.