Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV NARULA
Khadi and Village Industries Commission – Appellant
Versus
JBMR Enterprises – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemption applications for court fees (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. filing additional documents under commercial courts act (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. exemption from filing notarized affidavits (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. registration of plaint and issue of summons (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. trademark infringement and counterfeiting allegations (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. granting interim injunction (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
ORDER
[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
I.A. 7416/2021 (for exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
I.A. 7417/2021 (for extension of time for filing Court fee)
3. The present application u/Section 149 and 151 of CPC on behalf of the Plaintiff seeking extension of time for filing Court fee.
4. It is submitted that the Plaintiff, on account of being situated in Mumbai, is unable to transfer the Court fee directly to Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd., as their office is closed. Therefore, leave is sought to file the same upon resumption of regular functioning of the Court.
5. The application is allowed, subject to the Plaintiff filing court fee within two weeks from the day the lockdo
Plaintiff established a prima facie case for trademark and copyright infringement, necessitating an interim injunction to prevent consumer confusion and irreparable harm.
Plaintiff established a prima facie case of trademark infringement and copyright violation, leading to an injunction against Defendants' unauthorized use of trademarks.
The court established that the use of a similar mark that may cause consumer confusion constitutes trademark infringement and passing off, affirming the Plaintiff's exclusive rights over its register....
The court established that a prima facie case for relief exists when trademark infringement is evident, justifying ex parte interim injunction to prevent irreparable harm.
A plaintiff must demonstrate a prima facie case of trademark infringement, supported by evidence of prior use and likelihood of consumer confusion to obtain an ex-parte injunction.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of registered trademarks and the grant of interim injunctions to prevent trademark infringement and potential harm to consumers.
The court granted an ad-interim injunction for trademark and copyright infringement upon finding a prima facie case of passing off by the defendants, who adopted a deceptively similar mark subsequent....
Trademark infringement claims must prevent confusion in the marketplace, emphasizing the necessity for injunctions when identical marks are used in overlapping services, particularly in a global cont....
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
