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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3654

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Massey Ferguson Corp, USA – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.C.Aryama Sundaram, Senior Advocate, Mr.A.L.Somayaji, Senior Advocate, Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Advocate, Mr.Krishna Srinivasan, Senior Advocate for M/s.Ramasubramaniam Associates
For the Respondent:Mr.R.Sankarnarayanan, Senior Advocate, Mr.R.Parthasarathy, Senior Advocate, Mr.Rishab Gupta, Advocate, Assisted by Mr.Mithun V.Thanks, Ms.Shreya Gupta, Mr.Bikram Chaudhuri, Mr.Mukul Baveja, Ms.Prachi Gupta, Mr.Abhijeet Sadikale, Ms.Akhila Jayaraj, Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy, Mr.Allwin Godwin, Mr.Pratik Singvi, Mr.Keyur Jaju, Mr.Barathwaj, T

Table of Content
1. court rehearing interlocutory applications. (Para 1 , 2)
2. dispute over trademark usage by tafe. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. tafe's legal representation and arguments. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. concept of naked licensing in trademark law. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
5. decision to maintain status quo until resolution. (Para 48 , 49 , 50)

ORDER :

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

This Court is rehearing the interlocutory applications in these suits pursuant to the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court through its common judgment dated 18.11.2024 passed in O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.138 and 139 of 2024. By the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench, while remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge, set aside the order dated 17.10.2024 passed in O.A.No.745 of 2024 in C.O.S.(Comm.Div.)No.190 of 2024 and directed the parties to the dispute to maintain status-quo until the interlocutory applications are reheard by the learned Single Judge afresh and finally disposed of.

2. The dispute revolves upon the usage of the trademark ''Massey Ferguson” (MF) by Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited (TAFE). To avoid repetition of facts, this Court is not repeating the same, since the Division Bench in its com

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