Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Abbott Products Operations Ag – Appellant
Versus
Aprajita Sushma Proprietor Of Alrom Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under trade marks act (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. petitioner's continuous use and promotion of mark (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. respondent's claims regarding 'kreoflat' (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. court's analysis of evidence and claims (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 5. public interest warrants stringent measures against confusion (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 6. court's final order to rectify trademark register (Para 42 , 44 , 45) |
JUDGMENT :
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) to rectify, cancel and remove the entry relating to the registered trademark “KREOFLAT” bearing no.4694743 in Class 05 made in the name of the respondent no.1/Registry of Trade Marks.
BRIEF FACTS:-
2. The history of the petitioner is stated to date back to the year 1888 when its founder Dr. Wallace Calvin Abbott began manufacturing alkaloid medicine granules. Sometime in the year 1894, the petitioner was incorporated through its parent company, “Abbott Alkaloidal Company”, a medical publisher and manufacture
The court established that the test for confusing similarity in pharmaceuticals is stringent, with prior registered marks holding superior rights that protect against consumer confusion.
Pharmaceutical trademarks with shared descriptive suffix deceptively similar if phonetically alike when viewed as wholes; injunction on prima facie possibility of confusion mandatory, applying strict....
[The court established that in cases involving medicinal products, the threshold for proving deceptive similarity is lower due to the potential health risks associated with consumer confusion. The co....
The court established that prior use and the potential for public confusion are crucial in trademark registration disputes, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry.
Concealment of material facts can lead to the grant of an ad-interim injunction and dismissal of applications for cancellation of trademark registration.
The court affirmed that even slight phonetic and structural similarities between rival trade marks in the pharmaceutical industry can lead to confusion among consumers, warranting protection under tr....
The burden of proof on an ex-employee defendant in a trade mark infringement case and the relevance of uncontroverted evidence, such as the Court Commissioner's report, in establishing deceptive simi....
The use of the impugned marks EYESITE/Fig.2 and KL (Label) by the Defendants is likely to cause confusion and deception, thereby constituting infringement of the Plaintiffs' registered trademarks und....
Phonetic similarity between AZIWOK and AZIWAKE creates likelihood of confusion, warranting injunction to prevent trademark infringement.
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
