Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC  ||  Delhi High Court: Elective Surgery Does Not Bar Grant of Interim Bail on Medical Grounds  ||  Delhi HC: Consensual Romance With Minor Nearing 18 May be Considered For Bail in POCSO Case  ||  Delhi HC: Not Named In FIR Doesn’t Matter If Financial Links Show Active Role in NDPS Offence  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Rape is an Affront to Womanhood and a Brutal Violation of The Right To Life  ||  Supreme Court: Single Insolvency Petition Maintainable Against Linked Corporate Entities  ||  Supreme Court: Disputes are Not Arbitrable When the Arbitration Agreement is Alleged to be Forged  ||  Supreme Court: Temple Trust Does Not Qualify as an ‘Industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act    

Bombay HC Says Phonetic Similarity Not Enough for Alleging Trademark Infringement - (18 Apr 2016)

Bombay HC, while holding that mere phonetic similarity is not sufficient to warrant judicial interference, has refused to grant relief to owners of the London Dairy brand of ice cream who alleged trademark infringement by Indian candy-making company Parle Products.

Tags : BOMBAY HC   PHONETIC SIMILARITY   LONDON DAIRY   PARLE PRODUCTS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved