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

1966 Supreme(Mad) 369

T.RAMAPRASADA RAO
A. Abdul Karim Sahib – Appellant
Versus
A. Shanmugha Mudaliar – Respondent


Advocates:
K. Chandramouli, Advocate for Petitioner.
H. Devadoss, Advocate for Respondent.

Order.-

The petitioner before me is the plaintiff in the lower Court. The plaintiff instituted a suit on the ground that the defendant is passing off his trade mark and in particular asked for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing or marketing the goods under a mark which is deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s mark. The suit was instituted on 24th September, 1962 Two days after the institution of the suit, the plaintiff secured registration of his trade mark under the Trade Marks Act, and after obtaining such rights and before the case was taken up for trial, he filed I.A. No. 62 of 1965 in O.S. No. 3 of 1962 on. the file of the District Judge of North Arcot for amending the plaint incorporating therein two paragraphs which are extracted in the petition. One of those paragraphs really sets out the fact that the petitioner has secured registration of the trade mark under consideration under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act of 1958, and the other paragraph relates to the prayer portion and in effect is an enlargement of the prayer already on record by asking for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing, using, passing off












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