Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.23 seconds)M/S.Heinz Italia & Anr vs M/S.Dabur India Ltd on 18 May, 2007
Reliance is also placed on the judgment of the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of (2007) 6 SCC 1 Heinz Italia & Anr.
vs. Dabur India Ltd. where the court reiterated that principles of similarity
FAO(OS) 163/2010 Page 8 of 13
could not be very rigidly applied and that if it could be prima facie shown
that there was a dishonest intention on the part of the defendant in passing
off the goods, an injunction should ordinarily follow.
Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma vs Navaratna Pharmaceutical ... on 20 October, 1964
Learned counsel for the appellants also relies upon the judgment of
the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of AIR 1965 SC 980 Kaviraj Pandit
Durga Dutt Sharma vs. Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories where the
court held that where there is an imitation, no evidence is required to
establish that the plaintiff‟s rights are violated. Reliance is also placed on the
judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of AIR 1978 SC 1613
R.G.Anand vs. M/s.Delux Films& Ors. where the Court held that one of the
surest and safest test to determine whether or not there has been a violation
of copyright is to see if the reader, spectator or the viewer after having read
or seen both the works is clearly of the opinion and gets an unmistakable
impression that the subsequent work appears to be a copy of the original.
Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. vs Hind Cycles Limited on 28 April, 1972
24. Similarly, the learned Single Judge also places reliance on the
judgment of this court in the case of (1973) ILR Delhi 393 M/s. Atlas Cycle
Industries Ltd. v. Hind Cycles Limited, were this Court held as under:-
Section 10 in The Delhi High Court Act, 1966 [Entire Act]
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
T.V. Venogopal vs Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. & Anr on 3 March, 2011
20. Learned counsel for the respondents relies upon judgment of the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of (2011) 4 SCC 85 T.V.Venugopal vs.
Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. & Anr. where the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held
that the adoption of the word "Eenadu" is ex facie fraudulent and a mala fide
attempt from the inception inasmuch as the appellant in that case is stated to
have wanted to ride on the reputation and goodwill of the respondent
company. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court held that permitting the appellant to
carry on its business would in fact be putting a seal of approval of the court
on the dishonest, illegal and clandestine conduct of the appellant. The Court
further held that honesty and fair play ought to be the basis of policies in the
world of trade and business.
Section 10 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Fuji (International) Ltd vs Fuji Photo Films Coy. Ltd on 31 October, 2012
23. The learned Single Judge has relied upon observations of the Court in
the case of (1951) 68 Reports of Patent Cases 271(2) Taw Manufacturing
Coy. Ltd. vs. Notek Engineering Coy.Ltd. & Anr. relevant portion of which
reads as follows:-
1