Back
SUNITA AGARWAL, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Unisn Health Check Up And Diagnostics LLP – Appellant
Versus
Unison Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sunita Agarwal, CJ.,) :
1. The present Appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(R) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 18.05.2024 passed by the Judge, Commercial Court, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in deciding the Application (Exhibit 7), for interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rule (1) & (2), in Commercial Trade Mark Suit No.13 of 2023. The said suit has been filed with the relief of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant and its agent etc. from using the trade mark / trade name ‘UniSN’, to carry out their trade, on the plea that the act of the defendants amounts to infringement of plaintiff’s registered trade mark ‘UNISON’ in Class 5 and Class 10.
2. The Trial Court while allowing the interim injunction application (Exh.7) has observed that the plaintiff has been using the trade mark ‘UNISON’ since 1980 and got the said trade mark registered since 2003 and 2012. Documentary evidences such as invoices, Statement of account, turnover of goods under the said trade mark from the year 1998-1990 onward had been filed by the plaintiff. The finding is that the defendant is using trade mark "UniSN" only from 14.06.2021 an
The court established that trademark infringement requires a thorough comparison of marks, considering visual and phonetic similarities, and the nature of goods/services, ruling that no confusion was....
The court found that despite phonetic similarity, the distinctiveness of trade marks and differences in intended consumer bases negate the likelihood of confusion and passing off.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of deceptive similarity for trademark infringement and passing off, as well as the principles governing the grant or refusal of int....
The court ruled on trademark infringement, emphasizing phonetic and visual similarity between ISITE and EYESITE, resulting in consumer confusion, leading to a permanent injunction against the infring....
The court held that the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case of infringement and granted an ad interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the mark NOVAEGIS or [IMG] in any form or m....
The main legal point established is the protection of registered trademarks under the Trade Marks Act, emphasizing the exclusive rights of the registered proprietor, infringement of trademarks, and t....
A registered trademark derived from an INN does not confer exclusive rights over descriptive names, and differences in pricing and phonetic structure reduce the likelihood of consumer confusion.
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
