<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (5) TMI 409 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160074</link>
    <description>The High Court refused to rectify and strike off the trade mark from the register, finding that the appellant had used the trade mark bona fide and that the respondents had not established special circumstances for non-use. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, confirming that the High Court properly exercised its discretion. The appeal was dismissed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2014 13:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 409 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160074</link>
      <description>The High Court refused to rectify and strike off the trade mark from the register, finding that the appellant had used the trade mark bona fide and that the respondents had not established special circumstances for non-use. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, confirming that the High Court properly exercised its discretion. The appeal was dismissed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160074</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>