using the trade mark MAXTRADE or any other mark that
is identical/deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered
CS(OS) No.1023/2013 ... late November 2012, the
plaintiff learnt of the use of the identical/deceptively similar mark
'MAXTRADE' by the defendant with respect to identical
vide letter dated 18th September, 2003, stating that the
proposed mark was deceptively similar to plaintiff's mark.
15. Defendant ... mentioned applicants. In
any case, admittedly, all applications for ROLEX and/or deceptively
similar marks in the name of defendant No.1's related
2008 Page 4 of 21
other trade mark which is deceptively similar with the trade mark of the
plaintiff.
16. The defendants filed the written ... Apex court has held that
the trademark Gluvita and Glucovita are deceptively
similar.
( b) AIR 1963 449 Amritdhara Pharmacy vs. Satyadev
Gupta the Apex court
used by the defendant is
phonetically and structurally identical with or deceptively similar to Liv.52
thus the same is in violation of statutory ... similarity in the
two trademarks which is likely to cause confusion and deception and use of
the trade mark LIV-T by the defendant does
registered mark and the use of an
―identical‖ or ―deceptively similar‖ mark by another without any
permission/authority amounts to infringement of the registered
mark ... other
person using a mark which is the same or
deceptively similar to his trade mark, he can
protect his trade mark by an action
order to
just inform the Court that there is confusion or deception happened in the
I.A. No.21136/2013 in CS(OS) No.2655 ... aptitude test for students.
Therefore, the question of confusion and deception does not arise
in the present case. The relevant pages of "Wikipedia
plaintiff that the use of expression MAX, which is
identical/deceptively similar to the registered trademark MEX of the
plaintiff, either as a trademark ... trade name by the defendant is bound to
cause confusion and deception amongst the purchasing public and trade
which leading to think that the defendant
products obtained from the market
that they have not only adopted a deceptively similar mark
BECTODINE for identical products but have also adopted an
identical ... plaintiff that the mark BECTODINE used by
the defendants is deceptively similar to the well-known trademark
BETADINE of the plaintiff. It is pertinent
rights by using the trade mark MINDGYM or any other mark deceptively or
confusing similar to the plaintiff's mark THE MIND GYM either ... course of a trade mark which is
identical with or deceptively similar to the trade mark in
relation to any goods in respect of which
plaintiff in any manner
whatsoever and doing anything to cause confusion or deception
amongst the consumers.
2. Upon service, the defendants filed the written statement ... Court against the defendants who
are adopting and using visually, structurally and deceptively
similar motifs, pattern, designs and piece of art of the plaintiff
