Del. HC: Obtaining of Voice Samples of Accused Must be in Compliance with Telegraph Act  ||  P&H HC: Peaceful Protest is Not a Penal Offence Under Section 188 IPC  ||  All HC: AO Must Consider Form 10 u/s 17 Supplied After Limitation But Before Assessment is Completed  ||  Ker. HC Issues Guidelines on Handling Digital Evidence Containing Sexually Explicit Materials  ||  Del. HC: Cyber Crimes Dissuade Aspirations of Advanced 'Digital Bharat'  ||  Del. HC: Suspension of Entity Can’t be Continued Indefinitely  ||  Del. HC: Woman Can be 'Karta' of HUF  ||  SC: Court Can’t Impose Bail Condition that Husband Must Resume Conjugal Life with Wife  ||  SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Cal. HC Judgment that Adviced Adolescents on Sexual Behavior  ||  JKL HC: Court Can’t be Guided by Personal Law While Deciding Apportionment of Compensation    

Sumeet Appliances Pvt. Ltd. v. Dilip Kumar Jain and Ors. - (High Court of Bombay) (28 Oct 2015)

Bombay High Court lends a helping hand to ‘Sumeet’

MANU/MH/3002/2015

Intellectual Property Rights

The Bombay High Court held that the Defendant’s use of the mark ‘Sumeet’ was in infringement of the trade mark registered by the Plaintiff. Defendant’s claims that its similar mark ‘Sumeet sassaki’ was inspired by their deceased son were not accepted by the Court for not explaining why Defendant had modeled ‘Sumeet’ identically to the Plaintiff. It found inconsistencies and possible fabrication in the evidence produced, purporting to show assignment of mark to the Defendant.

Relevant : Hindustan Pencils Pvt. Ltd. v India Stationery Products Co & Anr. MANU/DE/0003/1990 Winthrop Products Inc v Eupharma Laboratories Ltd.MANU/MH/0094/1997

Tags : SUMEET   TRADEMARK   APPLIANCES   FABRICATION   ASSIGNMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved