Back
C. HARI SHANKAR
Bolt Technology Ou – Appellant
Versus
Ujoy Technology Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of goodwill by the plaintiff. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. nature of claim as passing off, not trademark infringement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. evidence of international presence and marketing strategies. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments presented by the defendant against trans-border reputation. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. counterarguments made by the defendant elaborating their market position. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. defendant's emphasis on lack of confusion and its market leading position. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. court’s analysis of passing off elements and trans-border reputation. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 8. conclusion on dismissing the plaintiff’s application. (Para 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT
IA 13529/2022 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC)
The Dispute
1. Formerly known as Taxify OU, the plaintiff was incorporated in 2013 in Estonia as a taxi aggregator, to aggregate all taxies in Tallinn, Estonia, Riga and Latvia on one platform. The plaintiff claims to have conceived and adopted the brand 'BOLT' in 2018, and that the expression signified speed as well as electricity. The plaintiff further avers that, und
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
