Back
JYOTI SINGH
Mikko Vault LIC – Appellant
Versus
Registrar Of Trade Marks – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. - Present appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') seeking setting aside of the impugned order dated 31.07.2018 passed by the learned Senior Examiner of Trade Marks in application No. 2628985, refusing to accept and advertise the trademark 'SENSE FLO' for goods in Class 10, as well as for a direction to accept and advertise the same.
2. Appellant had filed an application for registration of the trademark 'SENSE FLO' on 18.11.2013 and on 11.02.2015, the Examination Report was issued with the following objections:-
'The trade marks-which are devoid of any distinctive character, that is to say, not capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of another person; which consist exclusively of marks or indications which may serve in trade to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, values, geographical origin or the time of production of the goods or rendering of the service or other characteristics of the goods or service;
The Trade Mark application is open to objection on relative grounds of refusal under Section 11 of the Act because the sa
The distinctiveness acquired through extensive use and global presence of a trademark should be considered in the registration process.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of distinctiveness and acquired reputation in trademark registration under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
For trademarks filed on a proposed-to-be-used basis, evidence of secondary meaning is not required. Trademarks must be analyzed as a whole rather than being dissected into common constituent words, a....
Distinctiveness of a trade mark must be assessed in its entirety, not by dissecting its components, supporting the Anti-Dissection Rule.
A descriptive trademark can be registered if it is proven to have acquired distinctiveness through secondary meaning, alongside consideration of existing registrations and usage.
The court established that prior trademark use confers superior rights, emphasizing that mere modifications do not distinguish similar marks, especially in the pharmaceutical industry.
The use of the outline of the map of India as a trademark is not violative of Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 or the Emblems and Name (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of a trademark application can be justified based on phonetic and conceptual similarity with an earlier trademark, likelihood of....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of likelihood of confusion on the part of the public and the principle of comparing composite marks as a whole under Section 11(....
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
