P.K.BAHRI
CEAT TYRES OF INDIA LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
JAI INDUSTRIAL SERVICES – Respondent
( 1 ) HAVE heard the arguments for deciding this application seeking temporary injunction till the disposal of the suit. Ad interim injunction order already stands granted In favour of the plaintiff vide order dated December 16,1987.
( 2 ) THE planitiff is a proprietor of trade mark ceat registered under No. 204251 since August, 1961, in respect of pneumatic and solid tyres for vehicles. This trade mark ceat has been in use in India since 1951 earlier by the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff and the registration of the said trade mark still subsists in favour of the plaintiff. It is the case of the plaintiff that the trade mark/word ceat is a part of the plaintiff s company trading style and is also an invented word and the plaintiff has been selling huge quantities of tyres, tubes and other material under the trade mark ceat and the plaintiff commands good reputation and goodwill in the said name and the sale of such goods runs into crores of rupees in a /year and the goods are also exported to various countries under the said trade mark ceat It was also pleaded that a huge amount has been incurred and is being incurred for carrying out advertisemen
Rustom Alt Molla and other v. Bata Shoe Company Limited
Bata India Limited v. M/s. Pyare Lal and Company, Meerut City andothers
Company (P) Ltd. v. The Bridgestone Tyre Company Ltd. Tokyo, Japan
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Shamrao Maskar and Others
Nestles Produets Ltd. v. Milkmaid Corporation
Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd.
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.