Back
JAYANT NATH
Avtar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sakshi Srivastava – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JAYANT NATH, J.
IA Nos.8293/2020 & 9158/2020
1. IA 8293/2020 is filed by the plaintiffs seeking an injunction to restrain the defendants, their agents etc. from manufacturing or authorizing the manufacture, selling, offering for sale, marketing, retailing, supplying distributing, exhibiting, advertising, promoting, displaying etc. the impugned products and operating the impugned retail stores or any other product and retail store bearing the impugned marks WOODLEY
IMAGE
and NUWOODLEY as a trademark or as a trade name or part of the store name or retail or any other mark which is deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s trade name/mark WOODS, WOODS (stylised), WOODS
IMAGES
WOODLAND and WOODLAND (stylised)/
IMAGE
2. I may point out that when the matter came up for hearing on 18.09.2020, this court in IA No. 8293/2020 noting the averments in the plaint and the documents, concluded that the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case and that the balance convenience lies in favour of the plaintiffs. An ex parte ad-interim injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiffs in terms
Intellectual Property - In any case, in view of Section 17(2) (b) of Trademarks Act, plaintiffs cannot register the mark WOOD. It was stressed that under Section 17, where a trade mark consists of se....
Where a trade mark contains generic or common-to-trade terms, the proprietor cannot claim exclusive rights over those specific words. Comparison of marks for infringement must be done as a whole; if ....
The court found that despite phonetic similarity, the distinctiveness of trade marks and differences in intended consumer bases negate the likelihood of confusion and passing off.
The court found no infringement due to the distinctiveness of the marks, holding that the word 'FOREST' is generic, and the appellant failed to establish confusion among consumers.
The principle of prior user of a trademark prevails over subsequent registrations, especially when confusion or association is likely between goods and services of similar trade sectors.
The court emphasized likelihood of consumer confusion in trademark law, holding that similar marks can infringe established trademarks regardless of differences in service or field, thus supporting t....
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
