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

2000 Supreme(MP) 491

V.K.AGRAWAL
Laxmi Gudakhu Factory – Appellant
Versus
Avinash Gudakhu Factory – Respondent


Advocates:
Satish Agrawal for appellant; Ravindra Shrivastava for respondent.

ORDER

1. This miscellaneous appeal is directed against the order dated 14th December, 1999 in civil suit No. 32-A 1999 by District Judge, Raigarh, whereby the plaintiff/appellant's application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 r/w section 151 of the CPC, marked as IA No.1, was dismissed.

2. Undisputably, the plaintiff/appellant is a manufacturer of 'Gudakhu', which is being used as toothpaste. It carries on business in the name and style of 'Laxmi Gudakhu Factory' and sells, its product under the registered trade-mark 'Saraswati Chhap Gudakhu'. The label of the said product is at the top of 'Annexure-C', which is marked as "1" for the purpose of convenience. The above trade-mark was registered with the Registrar of Trade Mark under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the 'Act' for short) on 17.4.1967. It is also not in dispute that the registration as above has been renewed by the plaintiff/appellant, from time to time, and is still in force. Subsequently, the plaintiff/appellant received information in September, 1999 that the defendant/respondent No. 1 is also selling its product under the trade name 'Ma Saraswati Chhap Gudakhu'. The label used by the defendant/r




























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