Supreme Court: Non-Signatory That is Not a Veritable Party Cannot Invoke an Arbitration Clause  ||  SC: Bail Can't be Cancelled For Police Non-Appearance Once Chargesheet is Filed and Trial is Attended  ||  SC: New Arbitration Bill Fails To Provide a Statutory Appeal Against Tribunal Termination Orders  ||  SC: Employees Who Resign or Retire After Five Years of Service Are Entitled to Receive Gratuity  ||  SC: Employees Who Resign or Retire After Five Years of Service Are Entitled to Receive Gratuity  ||  Supreme Court: Higher Courts Should Avoid Unnecessary Remand of Cases to Lower Courts  ||  J&K&L HC: Under SARFAESI Act, Borrower's Right To Redeem a Secured Asset Ends With Auction Notice  ||  Calcutta HC: Income Tax Returns Can Be Used to Assess Victim's Income; ?39 Lakh Compensation Granted  ||  Delhi HC: Woman's Right to a Shared Household Does Not Allow Indefinite Occupation of In-Laws' Home  ||  Delhi HC: Director Disputes in a Company Do Not Qualify as Genuine Hardship to Delay ITR Filing    

Del. HC: Plea of Invalidity Essential to Challenge Validity of Mark U/S 124 of TM Act - (06 Nov 2023)

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Delhi High Court has held that for Section 124(1) of Trade Mark Act, to apply in a case where plaintiff seeks to challenge validity of the defendant’s mark, the defendant must raise Section 30(2)(e) defence by citing the registration of its mark as a defence to infringement.

Tags : DELHI HIGH COURT   TRADE MARK   VALIDITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved