An Identical Trademark

The Trade Marks Act, 1999 came into force on 15th September, 2003.   When a trade mark is identical with a registered trade mark and goods or services are identical too, Court shall presume it is likely to cause confusion on public. Court has pointed out, essentials of a passing off action cannot be equated […]

Read more "An Identical Trademark"

Red Herrings

Recently, Hon’ble Justice Prathiba M. Singh of Delhi High Court in Sulphur Mills Limited v. Dharmaj Crop Guard Limited, [CS(COMM) 1225/2018 & CC(COMM) 9/2019] said, to argue on the basis of submissions made before Commissioner of Customs, there is no novelty or inventive step in Indian Patent Number 282429, would lead to an anomalous situation […]

Read more "Red Herrings"

Rooh Afza Returns

It was claimed in Hamdard National Foundation v. Hussain Dalal, 202 (2013) DLT 291 Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani (2013, Dir. Ayan Mukherjee) contains some dialogues which injures the goodwill and reputation of ‘Rooh Afza’, a popular concentrated squash. It was admitted, ‘Rooh Afza’ is a well-known trademark. Attention was drawn to Section 29(9) of The […]

Read more "Rooh Afza Returns"

The Copyright Act, 1957

The expression ‘copyright’ has to be understood only as is stated in Section 14 and not otherwise. It is an exclusive right, which is negative in nature, being a right to restrict others from doing certain acts. The ownership of copyright in a work is different from the ownership of the physical material in which […]

Read more "The Copyright Act, 1957"

The Magic in Masala

‘Rexona’ or ‘Reebok’ prima facie appear to be invented or coined words. They may command a higher degree of protection if there is a contest. As regards ‘Magic’/’Magical’ and ‘Masala’, the words are commonly used in the food and cosmetic industry. Therefore, neither ITC nor Nestlé can claim any monopoly. No person can appropriate common […]

Read more "The Magic in Masala"

BMW v. DMW : Luxury Car v. E-Rickshaw

Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaf was founded in Munich, Germany in 1916. The commercial ties of BMW AG, in India, began in 1987 when the automobiles bearing the BMW marks were first sold. Om Balajee Automobile (India) Private Limited is manufacturing, marketing and selling e-rickshaws, e-cart rickshaws etc. under the trademark DMW. BMW AG got knowledge […]

Read more "BMW v. DMW : Luxury Car v. E-Rickshaw"

Monsanto v. Nuziveedu: Patent Battle

  My Lord, Nuziveedu infringed Monsanto’s patent ? “Technically complex suit. We leave open all questions of fact and law to be urged for consideration in appropriate proceedings. The suit involved complicated mixed questions of law and facts with regard to patentability and exclusion of patent which could be examined in the suit on basis of evidence. There is […]

Read more "Monsanto v. Nuziveedu: Patent Battle"

Chymoral Forte v. Chymtral Forte : Acquiescing Passing Off

Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., ‘first past the post’, has a trade mark called ‘CHYMORAL’ and ‘CHYMORAL FORTE’, which is a drug administered post-surgically for swelling and/or wounds that may arise. They filed a suit against Wockhardt Ltd. for use of the mark ‘CHYMTRAL FORTE’. Fraud is not a necessary element of ‘passing off’ actions [Laxmikant, (2002) […]

Read more "Chymoral Forte v. Chymtral Forte : Acquiescing Passing Off"

Mr. Robert “Bob” Zeidman

Diyora and Bhanderi Corporation v. Sarine Technologies Ltd. [Civil Appeal Nos. 7304-7305 of 2018] A copyright infringement action over proprietary software under the Respondent’s ‘ADVISOR’ trade mark triggered the dispute. The Respondent wished to direct Mr. Robert “Bob” Zeidman to compare the softwares and to report the Court as to whether the source code and object code of the […]

Read more "Mr. Robert “Bob” Zeidman"