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

2021 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 79832

MADRAS HIGH COURT
A, J
Rajasekaran G. S. and Others v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police Virudhunagar and Another


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Advocate A
For the Respondents:Advocate B

1. Both these criminal original petitions have been filed for quashing the FIR in Cr.No.483 of 2014 registered on the file of the Inspector of Police, Sivakasi East Police Station, Virudhunagar District for the offences under S.103, S.104 of Trademarks Act , 1999 and S.468, S.471 and S.420 of IPC. The de facto complainant is the second respondent herein. He is none other than the brother of the first petitioner herein. The case of the de facto complainant is that their family was carrying on business of manufacturing matches in the name and style of R.K. Match Company Private Limited and M/s.Thendral Match Works Industry. They were originally carrying on business as a partnership firm in the name of M/s. Soundarapandian Match Works which was later taken over by R.K. Match Company Private Limited. They were carrying on their business by using the trademark "Bulb". Bulb with violet colour background was registered as trademark No.1383622. Another trademark bulb with green colour was also registered as trademark No. 455169. When dispute arose between the two brothers, the matter was settled and two Memorandum of Understanding dated 30.03.2011 were also entered into between the parties














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