https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196932 Delay in seeking rectification can operate as acquiescence or waiver where the applicant knew of the mark, stood by for years, and the proprietor was prejudiced by continued use; the Court held relief was barred on those facts. Deceptive similarity must be judged by considering the mark as a whole, the nature of the goods, the relevant purchasing class, and surrounding circumstances, not by isolating a single word. Applying that test, the finding that the mark was deceptive or confusing was unsustainable. The rectification order was therefore set aside because both the equitable bar and the incorrect confusion analysis favoured the appellant. en-us Tue, 27 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Feb 2025 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196932 Delay in seeking rectification can operate as acquiescence or waiver where the applicant knew of the mark, stood by for years, and the proprietor was prejudiced by continued use; the Court held relief was barred on those facts. Deceptive similarity must be judged by considering the mark as a whole, the nature of the goods, the relevant purchasing class, and surrounding circumstances, not by isolating a single word. Applying that test, the finding that the mark was deceptive or confusing was unsustainable. The rectification order was therefore set aside because both the equitable bar and the incorrect confusion analysis favoured the appellant. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196932