IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BHARATI DANGRE, MANJUSHA DESHPANDE
Laser Shaving India Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
RKM International Products Pvt Ltd – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against dismissal of interim injunction (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. plaintiff's prior adoption, use, and goodwill in setmax (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. defendants' infringing similar packaging and tm opposition (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. interim application rejection prompts appeal (Para 11) |
| 5. no material suppression; no estoppel from tm responses (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. unclean hands bars relief; limited appellate interference (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. timeline reveals inconsistent tm registry representations (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 8. suppression of facts violates clean hands doctrine (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 9. merits differ from ad-interim vacation grounds (Para 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 10. prosecution history estoppel applies to tm claims (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 11. estoppel and unclean hands deny injunction (Para 47 , 48) |
| 12. uphold injunction refusal; dismiss appeal (Para 49) |
JUDGMENT :
BHARATI DANGRE, J.
1. The present Commercial Appeal is filed by the Original Plaintiff, Laser Shaving (India) Pvt Ltd (hereinafter referred to as Laser Shaving) being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge on 25/0




Chhaganlal Keshavlal Mehta vs. Patel Narandas Haribhai
Laxmikant V. Patel vs. Chetanbhai Shah and anr
S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu vs. Jagannath
Vee Excel Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs HAB Pharmaceuticals & Research LIM
BDA Private Ltd. Vs. Paul P. John & Anr.
Wander Ltd. V Antox India (P) Ltd.
Cadila Health Care Limited. Vs Cadila Pharmaceutical Limited
Ramjas Foundation and anr vs. Union of India and ors
Bhaskar Laxman Jadhav v. Karamveer Kakasaheb Wagh Education Society and Ors
Suppression of contradictory statements to trademark registry asserting marks dissimilar disentitles interim injunction in passing off and copyright suit; clean hands and prosecution history estoppel....
Ex-parte ad-interim injunction vacated for suppression of material facts in trademark infringement suit; plaintiff must disclose fully prior ownership, adverse orders, relationships with clean hands;....
The court upheld that lack of deceptive similarity precludes claims of trademark infringement and passing off, necessitating proof of goodwill and likelihood of confusion.
The court established that the rights of the prior user of a trademark are superior to those of a subsequent user, emphasizing the elements of goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage in passing off c....
Ex-parte interim orders were upheld against defendants for trade mark infringement, dismissing claims of suppression as insufficient given established rights and the distinct nature of John Doe actio....
An injunction obtained under misrepresentation cannot be vacated without proven suppression of material facts; established trademark rights remain effective despite prior lawsuits.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.