Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, K.KUMARESH BABU
J.R.K’s Research and Pharmaceuticals Pvt.Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sanjeevi Pharma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of trademark conflict and registrations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments from both parties about trademark use. (Para 6 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's observations on trademark rights and evidence. (Para 7 , 8 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. hearing and judgment delivery by the court. (Para 9 , 16) |
| 5. court's ruling on trademark infringement. (Para 15 , 17 , 21) |
JUDGMENT :
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.Kumaresh Babu J.)
The present Original Side Appeal has been filed against the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the learned single judge in C.S.No.651 of 2008, on the file of this court, whereby the learned single judge had dismissed the said suit.
2. The appellant company which was promoted by one Dr.J.R.Krishnamoorthy, formulated the Siddha medical oil for the treatment of Psoriasis. The said formulation was developed in association with the National Research Development Corporation (NRDC). The appellant company had marketed the said product under the brand name “777 Oil”, which was registered as the Trade Mark under the Trade Mark Registration No.1061418 in class 5, dated 20.11.2001.Its further claimed that the promoter of the appellant company had
The court held that while both parties have registered trademarks, the evidence does not substantiate exclusive rights to either mark as both were deemed to not have been adopted bona fide.
Appellate court interferes with trial court's refusal of interim injunction in passing off where findings on mark as generic lack pleadings support, plaintiff shows prior use/secondary meaning, and d....
Court emphasizes that prior use and goodwill in trade names give rise to rights that protect against passing off and copyright infringement.
Merely riding on strength of his trade mark registration, is indulging in conduct which is not transparent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the protection of trademarks and prevention of passing off, based on prior adoption, continuous commercial user, goodwill, and deceptive similarity....
The court held that similar trademarks operating in different markets do not always lead to confusion, emphasizing the need to prove distinctiveness and absence of confusion under the Trade Marks Act....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
