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

2013 Supreme(Mad) 1155

VINOD K.SHARMA
. – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The applicant No.1 is the Power of Attorney holder of Dr. Issac Mathai, the applicant No.1/plaintiff and director of Soukya Indain Holistic Centre Private Limited, the applicant No.2/plaintiff, a company registered under the Companies Act.

2. The plaintiffs/applicants have filed a suit for declaration that the defendant or any person drawing title through them are not entitled to infringe or attempt to infringe and pass off their services and business of the respondent/defendant by the use in connection therewith the trademark/trade name/domain name 'SOWKHYA' or any manner whatsoever, in respect of services i.e. medicinal and beauty treatments similar to "SOUKYA".

3. Consequential relief sought for is permanent injunction restraining the defendant or anybody drawing title through him from infringing the applicant/plaintiffs' registered trademark "SOUKYA" under registration Nos.904710 & 1419160 in class 5 and 42 respectively of the applicants/plaintiffs by manufacturing, use, advertisement, sale, offering for sale, exposing for sale of the trademark "SOWKHYA" or any other deceptively similar mark to "SOUKYA" with respect to services relating to medicinal and beauty trea


















































































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