Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (0.33 seconds)N.R. Dongre And Ors vs Whirlpool Corporation And Anr on 30 August, 1996
The said
decision of Whirlpool [N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corpn.,
1995 SCC OnLine Del 310 : AIR 1995 Del 300] was further
affirmed by the Supreme Court of India in N.R. Dongre v.
Whirlpool Corpn. [N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corpn., (1996)
5 SCC 714]
30.5. The above were the reasonings from the provisions
arising from the plain reading of the Act which gives clear
indication that the rights of prior user are superior than that
of registration and are unaffected by the registration rights
under the Act"
Chandrakant Sahu vs Coal India Limited 47 Wa/48/2018 Indra ... on 10 December, 2019
The Supreme
Court in Laxmikant V. Patel (supra) categorically held that
"Once a case of passing off is made out, the likelihood of
damage is presumed." The Court further observed that where
misrepresentation is likely to cause confusion, injury to goodwill
is a natural and foreseeable consequence.
S. Syed Mohideen vs P. Sulochana Bai on 17 March, 2015
15.11. The jurisprudence concerning the action of passing off
and prior user is no longer res-integra, having been
comprehensively elucidated and authoritatively settled by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in various landmark judgments.
Reaffirming this position, the Apex Court in S. Syed Mohideen
v. P. Sulochana Bai reported in (2016) 2 SCC 683, has
articulated the determinative criteria for such a cause of action,
relevant portions of which are extracted hereunder:
The Arms Act, 1959
Section 28 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 134 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
K. Narayanan And Anr vs S. Murali on 5 August, 2008
11.7 Counsel for the appellant relied upon judgments passed
in the cases of Sudhir Bahal Vs. Khyber Restaurant and
Anr. : 2013 (56) PTC 508 (IPAB), SmithKline Beechem
PLC Vs. Sunil Sarmalkar & Ors. : 2012 (52) PTC 418,
Amarvati Enterprises Vs. Karaikadu Chettinadu : 2008
(36) PTC 688, Fedders Lloyd Corporation Ltd. & Anr. Vs.
Fedders Corporation : 2005 (30) PTC 353 (Delhi) and K.
Narayanan and Anr. Vs. S.Murali : 2008 (38) PTC 22 (SC).
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT:-
M. Venkataramana Hebbar (D) By L.Rs vs M. Rajagopal Hebbar & Ors on 5 April, 2007
12.7 Counsel for the respondent relied upon the judgments
passed in the case of N. Venkataramana Hebbar Vs. M.
Rajagopal Hebbar and Ors. : (2007) 6 SCC 401, T.V.
Venugopal Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. and Anr. :
T.V. Venogopal vs Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. & Anr on 3 March, 2011
12.7 Counsel for the respondent relied upon the judgments
passed in the case of N. Venkataramana Hebbar Vs. M.
Rajagopal Hebbar and Ors. : (2007) 6 SCC 401, T.V.
Venugopal Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. and Anr. :