https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233603 Use of the mark TATA on pressure cookers is treated as infringing a well-known trade mark and as passing off where the mark has acquired reputation through long, extensive and exclusive use, supported by registrations and judicial recognition. Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 protects a registered mark with reputation in India against use on dissimilar goods if such use takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the mark's distinctive character or repute. Because the impugned mark was identical or deceptively similar, adopted for unrelated goods, and likely to create unjustified association and consumer deception, the analysis concludes that injunctive relief, destruction of infringing material, and compensatory damages are warranted. en-us Mon, 29 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 May 2013 05:38:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233603 Use of the mark TATA on pressure cookers is treated as infringing a well-known trade mark and as passing off where the mark has acquired reputation through long, extensive and exclusive use, supported by registrations and judicial recognition. Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 protects a registered mark with reputation in India against use on dissimilar goods if such use takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the mark's distinctive character or repute. Because the impugned mark was identical or deceptively similar, adopted for unrelated goods, and likely to create unjustified association and consumer deception, the analysis concludes that injunctive relief, destruction of infringing material, and compensatory damages are warranted. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 29 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233603