Corporate Law : Trademarks are critical for businesses to differentiate their goods or offerings from others in market. They help construct brand...
Corporate Law : Explore the risks and consequences of using an unregistered trademark, including potential legal actions and the implications of o...
Corporate Law : Learn how IP attorneys help in trademark registration, protecting intellectual property rights, and defending against infringement...
Corporate Law : A blog highlighting the importance of trademark protection in transborder trade in this globalized world....
Corporate Law : When registering a trademark, choosing an appropriate type from the trademark class list is crucial for legal safety. Each class w...
Corporate Law : Beware of fraudsters soliciting money for IP applications. Report any suspicious claims to the office. Applications processed lega...
CA, CS, CMA : Company Secretaries in Practice are allowed to be registered as Trade Marks Agent under Rule 144 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017, r...
Corporate Law : A writ petition is filed before Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur while challenging the Circular dated 28.08.2020 being issu...
Corporate Law : The Union Cabinet in its meeting dated 15.09.2020 gave the approval for signing the MoU with Denmark in the field of IP Cooperatio...
Corporate Law : A trademark application is processed in accordance with The Trade Marks Act, 1999 and The Trade Marks Rules, 2017. 1. Application ...
Corporate Law : Dive into the Supreme Courts judgment in Shyam Sel & Power Ltd vs Shyam Steel Industries Ltd case regarding trademark infringement...
Corporate Law : Gloster Cables claims ownership of the GLOSTER trademark in a dispute with Fort Gloster during insolvency proceedings. Learn about...
Income Tax : Explore the Delhi High Court's landmark judgment awarding ₹12 lakhs to Castrol in a deceptive trademark case against 'Newcast Ro...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court settles the trademark dispute between Theobroma Foods Pvt. Ltd. and Theos Food Pvt. Ltd. Read the full judgme...
Corporate Law : Discover groundbreaking People Interactive v. Gaurav Jerry case where Bombay High Court deems trademark use in meta-tags illegal, ...
Corporate Law : Trade Marks (Holding Inquiry and Appeal) Rules 2024 now in effect. New procedures for complaints, inquiries, and appeals under the...
Corporate Law : Explore the proposed Trade Marks (1st Amendment) Rules, 2024 by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. Learn about adjudication pr...
Corporate Law : The common or generic names of the commodity contained in the package and in case of packages with more than one product, the name...
Corporate Law : It has been brought to the notice of the under signed that the documents submitted at the counter of the Trade Marks Registry, Mum...
Corporate Law : A registered trademarks agent may apply in Form TM-G for alteration of his name, address of the place of residence, address of the...
Trade Mark registration is quasi-judicial process and tends to be time consuming as it involves various steps, inter-alia, examination, publication and disposal of opposition. Sharp increase in the applications filed in the recent years and shortfall in manpower are the other reasons for delay.
If in the sale it becomes reasonably necessary for the manufacturer of adaptable goods, to refer to the trademark of the relatable goods, such reference would not amount to an infringement of the trademark under which the relatable goods are sold, but has misapplied the evidence on record. The error committed is by proceeding upon the premise that the evidence establishes that the respondent manufactures gaskets specifically for the special sizes of pressure cookers manufactured by the appellant, ignoring that the evidence is to the contrary
The Court held that even if the defendant genuinely intended using the mark only to describe the aroma of the products, it would make no difference if the use of the mark is likely to be taken as a use as a trademark. The use of a registered trademark would constitute an infringement if it indicates a connection in the course of trade between the person and his goods.
In the 1st week of October, 2009, the petitioner came to know that the respondents have infringed its trademark by using the word ‘Arnimax’ on its products coupled with the trade dress and thereby has infringed the registered trademark and passed off its products as that of the petitioner. Accordingly, C.S. 360 of 2009 was filed and an interim order passed on 19th February, 2010 restraining the respondent from dealing with, offering for sale, advertising, marketing or publicising the impugned trademark ‘Arnimax’. Such order was continued on 8th April, 2010 and direction given for filing affidavits. An affidavit has been filed and a No Objection Certificate dated 9th December, 2002 has been relied upon by the respondent. Such No Objection Certificate was given by one Das Homoeo Laboratory (P) Ltd. No certificate of the petitioner has been produced. In fact on a comparison of the signature of the person who is the signatory to the certificate with the signature in the Indenture of Lease dated 25th March, 1988 the said signature will not tally. The licence given to Das Homoeo Laboratory (P) Ltd. by the owners of the registered trademark did not include the registered trademark ‘Arnimax’. Therefore, neither Das Homoeo Laboratory (P) Ltd. nor anyone deriving a right thereunder could have issued the No Objection Certificate. No document evidencing sale, registration or user has been produced by the respondent therefore the case of infringement made out subsists and the order dated 19th February, 2010 and subsequent orders passed be confirmed.
Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Girnar Exports (IPAB)- The four appeals are against the orders passed by the Deputy Registrar, Trade Marks at Chennai in three proceedings and the Deputy Registrar at Kolkata in one. The mark is Red Label. Application No. 397359 is for registration of the mark which is a label consisting of the word Red Label with a colour scheme of red and yellow in Roman and Arabic character in respect of tea (Class 30) which is the subject matter of TA/47/2003/TM/CH.
In order to provide enhanced services to its stakeholders, MCA in a joined up service with the Trademark department has provided a facility for searching the trademark database before applying for Name availability. You can now use the link ‘Public Search of Trade Marks’ available on the MCA21 portal before applying for a company name to verify that the name is not subjected to any trademark or pending for trademark registration.
Pending Trademark Disputes The number of trademark dispute applications/files, which are under opposition and pending in the various offices of the Trade Marks Registry, is as under:-
Providing relief to a Chinese company, Double Coin Holdings Ltd, the Delhi High Court has restrained Trans Tyres (India) Pvt Ltd from selling tyres and tubes bearing the brand name ‘Double Coin’. Trans Tyres is a selling agent of the Chinese company and has got registration of trademark ”Double Coin” for tyres and tubes in India in its name.
The government today said it will issue a public notice by next week to reconstruct 44,000 missing files from the trademarks office. The files will be reconstructed as per an undertaking given by the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks to the Delhi High Court which had issued directives in this regard.
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Limited. vs Sami Khatib Of Mumbai (Medley Pharmaceuticals Limited). A division bench of the Bombay high court last week dismissed the appeal of Cadila Pharmaceuticals against the judgement of a single judge bench restraining Cadila from manufacturing, marketing or exporting medicinal preparations under the trade mark “Hb TONE”/ “HB TONE” or any other mark deceptively similar to the trademarks of another company, Medley Pharmaceuticals, namely “ARBITONE”, “RB TONE” or “HB RON”. The complaint was that Cadila was “passing off” the products with similar names.
