Search Results for "Trade Mark Rectification"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Incredible Dying Declaration...
Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Under Section 182 IPC for Lack of Val...

Search Results for "Trade Mark Rectification"

97 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 97 result(s)

High Court

Madras High Court Allows Rectification of Trademark for Non-Use and Discrepancy in User Date — Ayyappan Brand Registration Expunged. The court held that failure to prove use of the mark as registered and unexplained discrepancy in user date warrant removal under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

11 Mar 2026

The petitioner, M/s.Sree Lakshmi Balaji Industries, filed a petition under Sections 47, 57, and 125 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking removal/rect...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Hears Rectification Petition Filed by Le Shark Apparel Limited Seeking Cancellation of Respondents' Registered Trade Mark No. 466002 in Class 25. Petition Based on Grounds of Non-Use Under Section 47 and Fraudulent Registration Under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

14 Oct 2025

The petitioner, Le Shark Apparel Limited, filed a Commercial Miscellaneous Petition before the High Court of Bombay seeking rectification of the respo...

High Court

Madras High Court Dismisses Transfer of Rectification Petitions Under Trade Marks Act; Statutory Rectification Jurisdiction Confined to High Court Exercising Appellate Jurisdiction over Appropriate Registry. Interpretation of Sections 47 and 57 of Trade Marks Act, 1999, and Rule 4 of Trade Mark Rules, 2017, Precludes Exercise of Jurisdiction by High Court Over Entries Made by Another Registry.

20 Feb 2025

The petitioner, a company engaged in trade mark disputes, had filed a civil suit before the Madras High Court (Commercial Division) for infringement a...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Adjudicates Writ Petition Challenging IPAB's Dismissal of Trade Mark Rectification Under Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Court Examines the Interplay Between Common Law Rights and Registered Trade Marks, Specifically Sections 27(2), 28, 47, and 57, in Context of Deceptive Similarity Between 'ROFOL' and 'PROFOL'.

3 Apr 2012

The dispute between Medical Technologies Limited (petitioner) and Neon Laboratories Limited (respondent no.1) concerned the trade marks 'PROFOL' and '...

High Court

Madras High Court Adjudicates Cross-Petitions for Rectification of Trade Mark Register Under Sections 47, 57, and 125 of Trade Marks Act, 1999. Dispute Involves Competing Claims for Removal of Respective Registered Marks in Class 9.

20 Feb 2025

...

High Court

Madras High Court Allows Rectification of Trademark Registration for 'ABACUS' in Educational Services — Petitioner's Prior Use and Reputation Established. The Court held that the mark 'ABACUS' is descriptive and not inherently distinctive, but the petitioner had acquired secondary meaning through long and extensive use since 1987.

8 Jan 2025

The petitioner, Abacus Montessori School, filed a rectification petition seeking removal of the trademark registration No. 1586733 in Class 41 for 'AB...

High Court

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Seeking Transfer of Rectification Petitions; Holds Jurisdiction for Rectification Lies with High Court of Appropriate Office. The Court interpreted the definite article 'the' in Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 to mean the High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction over the relevant Trade Marks Registry, and held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to transfer rectification petitions when the court lacks statutory jurisdiction.

20 Feb 2025

The petitioner, a private company, filed C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.199 of 2023 before the Madras High Court against several parties including the 5th respond...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Allows Petitioner in Trade Mark Rectification Case Due to Prior Rights and Dishonest Adoption. Impugned 'C21' Registrations Cancelled as Respondent Incorporated 'CENTURY 21' into Corporate Name and Registered Identical Marks Without Explanation, Violating Sections 11, 47, 57 of Trade Marks Act, 1999.

6 Mar 2026

The dispute involved a multinational franchising company, the Petitioner, engaged in real estate business under the marks 'CENTURY 21' and 'C21', chal...

High Court

Madras High Court Allows Rectification of Trade Mark Registrations for 'WHISPER' and 'ALWAYS' Marks — Petitioner's Prior Use and Well-Known Status Established, Respondent's Registration Cancelled.

6 Jan 2026

The petitioner, The Procter & Gamble Company, a multinational corporation, filed three original petitions under Sections 47, 57, and 125 of the Trade ...

High Court

High Court Sets Aside Registrar's Order Rejecting Trade Mark Application Due to Lack of Reasoning and Failure to Consider Honest Concurrent Use. The Court held that the Registrar's order was unreasoned and ignored material on honest concurrent use under Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, violating statutory requirements under Sections 18(5) and 91.

23 Mar 2026

The dispute arose from a petition filed by Petitioner challenging an order dated 19 May 2025 by the Registrar of Trade Marks, which rejected the petit...

1 2 3

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)