Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ANU SIVARAMAN, G.BASAVARAJA
Remedi Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd., Represented Herein By Its Authorised Signatory Ramesh H.R. – Appellant
Versus
Neurosynaptic Communications Pvt. Ltd., Represented Herein By Its Authorised Signatory Mr. Sameer S. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
This Commercial appeal is directed against the order dated 06.07.2024 passed on I.As.No.2, 5 and 7 in Com O.S.No.111/2024 by X Additional District and Sessions Judge (Dedicated Commercial Court) Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as "Commercial Court" for short).
2. The operative portion of order under appeal reads as follows:-
"I.A.No.2 filed by the plaintiff under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C is hereby allowed and an order of ad-interim temporary injunction is granted restraining the defendants, its Directors, officers, employees, agents, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors-in- interest, assigns and any other person claiming through or under them, from in any manner using the trade mark 'Remedi' and any other trademark which incorporates the plaintiff's trademark 'Remedi' or which is deceptively similar or identical to the plaintiff's trademark 'Remedi' in respect of medical and diagnostic products or services related thereto, during the pendency of the suit.
The applications (IA-5 and 7) filed by the defendants under section 124 of TRADE MARKS ACT 1999 are hereby rejected.
No order as to costs."
3. The learned senior counsel a
The court affirmed the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court to grant injunctions under the Trade Marks Act, emphasizing the registration and prior use of trademarks while clarifying the territorial l....
Prior use and registration of a trademark are essential for establishing rights and preventing consumer confusion in trademark disputes.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of prior user and registration of a trade mark, likelihood of confusion due to similarity, and the lack of evidence to prove a te....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that registration under the Copyright Act and Excise Act does not permit infringement of a registered trade mark. The significance of disclaimer in....
A plaintiff must use their registered trademark to claim infringement; failure to do so undermines the basis for an injunction.
A plaintiff must prove prior use of a trademark to obtain a temporary injunction, and delays in seeking relief can adversely affect the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
