Back
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Kutbuddin Kanorwala – Appellant
Versus
Zakir Hussain Kanorwala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the present appeal is being heard and decided finally at this stage by this judgment.
2. The present first appeal has been filed by appellant- Kutbuddin against the order dated 02.09.2022 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Udaipur (for short "the trial Court"), whereby, the application preferred by defendant-respondent No.1- Zakir Hussain under Section 28(3), Section 29 and Section 30 (2)(e) of the Trademark Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") had been allowed and the suit preferred by the appellant-plaintiff as well as the counter claim filed by the defendant-respondent No.1 had been dismissed.
3. Briefly, the facts necessary to be noted in the present first appeal are that on 01.01.1979, a partnership firm namely M/s. Z.A. Kanorwala was founded by the partners Mr. Zakir Hussain Kanorwala (respondent No.1 in the instant appeal) and Mr. Abbas Ali Kanorwala, who adopted a distinctive trade mark "ZK" (label) in respect of business of manufacturing, trading, marketing, offering for sale and selling of all kinds of spices falling in class 30 for the goods-spices vide Registrati
The court ruled that a suit for trademark infringement and passing off is maintainable even when both parties hold identical trademarks in different classes, emphasizing the need for adjudication on ....
The court upheld the plaintiff's rights as the prior user and registered owner of the trademark, granting an injunction against the defendant's use of a similar mark due to the likelihood of consumer....
The principle of prior user of a trademark prevails over subsequent registrations, especially when confusion or association is likely between goods and services of similar trade sectors.
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.
Important Point :The use of a trademark that is phonetically and visually similar to a registered trademark can lead to confusion, constituting infringement, especially when dishonest conduct is evid....
A prior user of a trademark is entitled to a permanent injunction against a subsequent user who uses the same or a deceptively similar trademark for similar products, if the subsequent user's use is ....
The use of the mark 'SUPER POSTMAN' by defendants was found to infringe the plaintiff's rights in the 'POSTMAN' mark due to deceptive similarity and ongoing goodwill of the plaintiff's trademark desp....
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
