SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Puma Se – Appellant
Versus
Hi-Tec Point Technologies P. Ltd. – Respondent


Table of Content
1. court observes lawful nature of settlement. (Para 1 , 7 , 10 , 11)
2. plaintiff seeks protection of puma mark. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. settlement reached between parties. (Para 8 , 9)
4. decree issued in favor of plaintiff. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

I.A. 7860/2022 (u/O XXIII Rule 3 CPC) in CS(COMM) 137/2021

2. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff- PUMA SE seeking protection of its mark `PUMA' which was coined and adopted by it internationally in 1948. The Plaintiff's brand `PUMA' is one of the world's leading sports brand designing, developing, selling and marketing footwear, apparel and accessories. The mark `PUMA' has been used in India from 1980's onwards and the same is registered under several classes. Defendant No.1- M/s Hi-Tech Point Technologies Pvt. Ltd. started a Global Positioning System (hereinafter `GPS') service through electronic application by the name `PUMA GUARD'. Defendant No.2 - Black Box GPS Technology OPC Pvt. Ltd. also launched a device with GPS tracking and anti-theft capabilities under the mark `PUMA'.

3. Defendant No.1 filed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top