delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Use of trade marks as keywords cannot, by any stretch, be construed as applying the registered trade mark to any material intended to be used for labelling or packing goods, as a business paper, or for advertising goods or services.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“The continued use of the impugned mark will affect the purity of the registered trade mark as the same is likely to cause deception and confusion, in terms of Section 11(2) and 11(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Spa services have a requirement for high quality, best hygiene, safety/security of customers and if unauthorized use of plaintiff’s mark ‘ANGSANA’ is permitted to be used, the same will result in severe erosion of its goodwill.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Defendants’ act of adopting mark which is structurally and visually nearly identical to that of plaintiff along with a trade dress which is also imitative of that of plaintiff, indicates that defendants have strained every nerve to come as close to plaintiff as possible.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Maintenance pendente lite/permanent alimony u/s 24 or 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 may be claimed by either wife or husband. The phrase “sufficient for her or his support” has to be interpreted to mean that applicant is able to maintain with reasonable comfort and standard of living which applicant was accustomed in matrimonial home.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Even if two device marks are visually completely dissimilar, and if their textual components are deceptively similar to each other, then visual dissimilarities between marks, owing to “added matter”, pale into insignificance, where infringement is concerned.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Purpose of examination is to screen out best candidates available for job and since petitioner obtained more than minimum required marks, he should have been considered for Stage-II under General Category as his rejection is not based on merit but only on account of document verification.”

Continue reading