Introduction: The lawsuit was initiated by the plaintiffs Hamdard National Foundation (India) and Hamdard Dawakhana, who also conduct business as Hamdard Laboratories India, against the defendants Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Limited and M/s. Golden Leaf. The claim is related to the trademark infringement of plaintiff’s product as well as mark “ROOH AFZA” at e commerce … Continue reading ARE YOU ALSO BUYING ‘ROOH AFZA’, THE ONE MANUFACTURED IN PAKISTAN ?
Whether director is liable for offence under section 138, even if not signatory to cheque?
PLOT: The respondent and the Petitioner Company entered into certain transaction, in furtherance of which, the authorized signatory of the Company issued certain cheques in favour of the respondent complainant. The cheques, when presented for its realization, were returned for want of sufficient funds, which leads the complainant to take recourse to legal proceedings against … Continue reading Whether director is liable for offence under section 138, even if not signatory to cheque?
WHAT IS PROCESS FEES IN A CASE AND PROCEDURE TO FILE PROCESS FEE IN COURT
Process fees (PF) A process fee is chargeable by the court to serve the other party involved in the case for example for serving summons, notices, and so on. Whenever anything has to be served to another party through court, pf is filed. No process shall be issued until the proper fee for its service … Continue reading WHAT IS PROCESS FEES IN A CASE AND PROCEDURE TO FILE PROCESS FEE IN COURT
INFRINGEMENT OF INDIA’S TRUSTED BRAND “TATA”
INTRODUCTION: The plaintiff, Tata Sons Private Limited, has brought this lawsuit against the defendants Anjani Bagaria and Mazing Retail Private Limited in the High Court of Delhi, in an effort to seek permanent injunction restraining trademark infringement, passing off, dilution, and tarnishment of trademarks. The plaintiff, Tata Sons Private Limited, is the major investment holding company … Continue reading INFRINGEMENT OF INDIA’S TRUSTED BRAND “TATA”
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT OF INTEL AND DIRECTION TO REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES TO CHANGE THE NAME OF INFRINGER COMPANY
Introduction: The current lawsuit was brought by Intel Corporation, USA in 2006 against three companies: Intel Gas Gadgets (P) Ltd., Intel Gas Guards (P) Ltd., Intel Safety Devices, and their respective director, Mr. S.P. Gupta. The lawsuit sought a long-term injunction prohibiting trademark use, delivery up, passing off, damages, and infringement. Plaintiff: The plaintiff, Intel Corporation, USA, … Continue reading TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT OF INTEL AND DIRECTION TO REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES TO CHANGE THE NAME OF INFRINGER COMPANY
CASE OF “TAK” MARK INFRINGEMENT OF THE MEDIA CHANNEL “AAJ TAK”
CASE: LIVING MEDIA INDIA LTD. & ANR VS. AAB TAK CHANNEL.COM (JOHN DOES) & ORS Brief facts: All the defendant has used the suffix “Tak” on which Plaintiffs have the legal right under Trademark bearing trade mark number 1242922 in class 38 and trade mark number 1242921 in class 41. Moreover, the mark is also … Continue reading CASE OF “TAK” MARK INFRINGEMENT OF THE MEDIA CHANNEL “AAJ TAK”
ALL ABOUT LAW OF INJUNCTION UNDER ORDER 39 CPC
Order 39, Code of Civil Procedure What is an Injunction? An injunction is an equitable remedy where an individual is commanded by a court – having authority over that individual – to perform or cease to perform a specific action, provided, if the court were not to intervene would cause irreparable harm to the status … Continue reading ALL ABOUT LAW OF INJUNCTION UNDER ORDER 39 CPC
Harmonious Interpretation of the Statute of Trademark Law: RENAISSANCE V. SAI RENAISSANCE
Time and again, the provisions laid in the statute and their interpretations by the Courts have come into light in various decisions, which has made it clearer that textual and contextual interpretation goes hand in hand. One cannot be ignored for the other nor the absence of one can make up for the other. Both … Continue reading Harmonious Interpretation of the Statute of Trademark Law: RENAISSANCE V. SAI RENAISSANCE
DUCTUS EDGE 