Back
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Intel Corporation – Appellant
Versus
S. P. Gupta – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The Plaintiff- Intel Corporation, USA had filed the present suit in 2006 against three entities, namely, Intel Gas Gadgets (P) Ltd., Intel Gas Guards (P) Ltd. and Intel Safety Devices, and Mr. S.P. Gupta, director of the said defendants. The suit was for permanent injunction restraining trademark infringement, passing off, damages, delivery up, etc. The grievance of the Plaintiff in the present suit is the use of the mark `INTEL' as part of the trading style, corporate name, and domain name, etc. by the Defendants as also as trademark in respect of the Defendants' products.
3. The Plaintiff, incorporated in 1968, is engaged in the business relating to computers and computer parts, including, semi-conductor devices, memory chips, microprocessors, central processing units, motherboard, etc. The Plaintiff is a multi-national corporation with business operations in more than 40 countries and 199 offices worldwide, at the time of filing of the suit. The Plaintiff had been exporting products to India as far back as 1972 and it formally established its operations in Indian the year 1988 with opening
The main legal point established in the judgment is the recognition of the trademark 'INTEL' as a well-known trademark and the finding that its use by the Defendants constituted infringement and pass....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of trademark rights under Section 29(5) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, based on the Plaintiff's prior adoption and registration of....
The unauthorized use of a registered trademark by a third party, which adds confusion and dilutes its distinctiveness, constitutes infringement under trade mark law.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the grant of a permanent injunction and other relief based on the defendant's infringement and passing off of the plaintiff's registered Tradema....
Unauthorized use of a trademark without permission or authorization constitutes infringement and passing off, causing harm and injury to the trademark owner and the public.
The court established that use of deceptively similar marks constitutes trademark infringement and warranted a permanent injunction to protect the Plaintiff's well-known mark.
In cases of trademark infringement and passing off, the court may grant a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from using a deceptively similar mark and may award damages and costs to the p....
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;....
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
