Search Results for "Trade Marks Registry"

142 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 142 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Trademark Dispute: Examination of Ex-Parte Injunction and Material Disclosure Obligations.

The case concerns a trademark dispute where Dharampal Satyapal Foods Ltd., the defendant, sought to vacate an ex-parte injunction granted to Parle Pro...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Suit — Star Zing Marks Protected. Use of identical marks 'White Chinese Pepper Masala' and 'Black Chinese Pepper Masala' by Defendant restrained as deceptively similar to Plaintiff's registered trademarks.

The Plaintiff, Sky Enterprise Private Ltd., filed a commercial IP suit alleging infringement of its registered trademarks and passing off by the Defen...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Upholds Injunction in Trademark Infringement Case — 'Cothagiri' Mark Deceptively Similar to 'Cothas'. Defendant restrained from using mark 'cothagiri' for coffee products as it is phonetically and structurally similar to plaintiff's registered trademark 'Cothas'.

The case involves a trademark infringement dispute between two coffee companies. The appellant, M/s Avighna Coffee Pvt. Ltd., was the defendant in the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Upholds Injunction Against Defendant in Trademark Infringement Case — 'Cothagiri' Mark Deceptively Similar to 'Cothas'. Court Restrains Defendant from Using Mark 'Cothagiri' for Coffee Products, Finding Prima Facie Case of Passing Off Under Trade Marks Act, 1999.

The case involves a trademark dispute between M/s. Cothas Coffee Co. (plaintiff/respondent) and M/s. Avighna Coffee Pvt. Ltd. (defendant/appellant). T...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging IPAB Order Refusing Additional Evidence in Trademark Opposition. Court holds that the IPAB's refusal to allow additional documents was not perverse or arbitrary, and the petitioners failed to show sufficient cause for not producing them earlier.

The petitioners, M/s. Agar Distributors (India) and Shri Siraj Amirali Soorani, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 16 July 2010 passed b...