P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Honeywell International Inc. v. Pravin Thorat and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (24 Aug 2015)

Court grants injunction against use of trademark 'Honeywell' by bakery

MANU/DE/2424/2015

Intellectual Property Rights

The Court, noting that Honeywell, a multi-national with revenues of $39 billion, and employing 13,000 persons in India alone, could suffer aggravated infringement if the Defendants continued to use the name 'Honeywell' for their three bakeries in Pune. It noted the possibility of confusion in consumers who may be falsely induced into believing that the Defendant had a direct nexus or affiliation with Honeywell. The Court held that use of the trademark by the Defendant would lead to a “gradual whittling away of the exclusivity and uniqueness of the goods and services that are associated with the Plaintiff's trademark Honeywell".

Relevant : Time Incorporated Vs. Lokesh Srivastava & Anr., MANU/DE/0104/2005 Microsoft Corporation Vs. Rajendra Pawar & Anr., MANU/DE/9851/2007

Tags : TRADEMARK   HONEYWELL   BAKERY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved