Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940
Section 9 in The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 33 in The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Hayakawa Denki Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha ... vs Associated Electronic And Electrical ... on 10 September, 1973
31. Now, I will deal with the opponents' next objection raised under Section 11(a) of the Act. This Section is invoked on the allegation that the impugned mark is likely to cause confusion and deception among the public and trade. This objection is ap
patently based on the alleged use and reputation of the opponents's trade mark 'LUDEM' under Section 11(a), before the objection can be sustained, it is necessary for the opponent to establish a reputation in trade in connection with the said mark, before the Tribunal or Court will proceed to consider whether having regard to that reputation the possibility of confusion upon reasonable user of the mark applied for will arise as held in Arthur Fairest's Appln. (1951) 68 RFC 197 at page 207 and Hayakawa Electricity v. Associated Electronic (1974) 1 MLJ 392. Reputation is a question to be established by evidence. The burden of proof is on the person who alleges reputation. The material date for establishing, it is the date of an application for registration, since the rights of the parties are to be determined as on that date.