impugned trade mark. In the notice the applicant has called upon the first respondent to stop the use of the infringed trade mark 'FIELD MARSHAL ... applicant to stop the use of trade mark makes clear about the use of the trade mark 'FIELD MARSHAL' by the first respondent
relation to actions of passing off on the basis of unregistered trade marks generally for deciding the question of deceptive similarity:-
(a) The nature ... taken into consideration while deciding the issue relating to an unregistered trade mark in passing-off matters, surely was influenced by the principles laid down
held that the mark ROLAC for pharmaceuticals of therapeutic value is of deceptive and confusion similarity to the mark TOROLEC for analgesic. The learned counsel ... consideration for dealing of passing off matters on the basis of unregistered trade marks for deciding the question of deceptive similarities.
6. In the instant
been using their mark from 1st April 1985, which is a date prior to the opponent's use of trade mark in India which ... stated in an action for passing off on the basis of unregistered trade mark generally for deciding the question of deceptive similarity the following factors
trade mark. The objects of consideration in both the cases are distinct and different and not similar. Even otherwise in the trade marks in that ... stated in an action for passing off on the basis of unregistered trade mark generally for deciding the question of deceptive similarity the following factors
trade mark does not fall within the prohibition of Section 8 and therefore it should be registered. Moreover in deciding whether a particular trade mark ... particular trade mark, what association he would form by looking at the trade mark, and in what respect he would connect the trade mark with
appellant are in consistent use of the trade mark since 1949. The proprietors of the trade mark, namely, Prestige. Housewares India Limited have stepped into ... user of the mark relates back to 1949. The mark 'proposed to be used' advertised in the Trade Marks Journal as mentioned above
marks are different, there cannot be any confusion or deception. He referred to para 17,34 of the book "Law of Trade Marks ... stated in an action for passing off on the basis of unregistered trade mark generally for deciding the question of deceptive similarity the following factors
trade mark in their name. Since the first respondent failed to establish their ownership as well as the use of the impugned trade mark ... between the trade marks of the applicant and the first respondent. Further, he contended that the impugned trade mark is the house mark
names to be a case of transmission of an unregistered trade mark and thus he concluded that the provisions of Section ... implies that there is no case of an existing registered or unregistered trade mark involved. The substantive provisions of the Trade and Merchandise Marks
