manner or from adopting or
using any marks identically or deceptively similar to the
registered trade mark "Gulab", which is a prior used ... 2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2024
undefined
deceptively similar to the registered trade mark of the
plaintiffs "Rose" with device, which
shape, getup, layout, which is
identical with or colourably / deceptively similar to the plaintiff's
product and from passing off their goods ... shape, getup, layout, which is identical with or
colourably / deceptively similar to the plaintiff's product and from
passing off their goods
Impugned Mark
belonging to Respondent No. 1 as being deceptively
similar to the prior and registered trademark of he
Applicant;
(C) Grant any other ... tours and travels
industry and cargo related services.
4.4.2 Identical or Deceptively Similar Marks: The Mark
used by respondent no.1 is phonetically, visually
trademark AXPERT , whereas the
defendant has started using the deceptively similar
trademark EXPERT recently. According to the
plaintiff, the defendant is very well within ... plaintiff's registered trademark, has adopted identical
and/ or deceptively similar trademark EXPERT. That,
defendant applied for registration of trademark
before the Trade Mark
said to be using the said trademark in a deceptively similar manner and that the plaintiff has suffered irreparable injury and loss due to illegal ... show that there is no possibility of one being accused of deceptively similar with the other and the likely customer mistaking one with the other
order to
encash such goodwill is using the trademark which is deceptively
similar to that of the Plaintiffs. The trial court therefore committed
serious error ... identical, the short question would be, are the two marks
deceptively similar? The term 'deceptively similar' is defined in
Page
registered in favour of the appellant or any other identical or deceptively similar products, and a direction to award token damages ... registered in favour of the appellant or any other identical or deceptively similar products during the pendency of the suit. The City Civil Court, Ahmedabad
dress of the
plaintiffs label which is almost identical and/or deceptively similar
of the plaintiffs registered Copyright which is same / similar
artistic work ... plaintiffs work in respect of Ayurvedic
Medicinal Oils goods which is deceptively similar to the plaintiffs
trademark "RAJ KHUSHBU" which amounts to infringement
trade mark
GEMIMAC or any mark identical with or deceptively similar to the
Plaintiff's reputed trade mark GERIMAC as their trade mark ... there
is a phonetic and/or visual similarity and that such similarity
between competing trade marks is deceptive and confusing then
injunction ought
trade mark
GEMIMAC or any mark identical with or deceptively similar to the
Plaintiff's reputed trade mark GERIMAC as their trade mark ... there
is a phonetic and/or visual similarity and that such similarity
between competing trade marks is deceptive and confusing then
injunction ought
