https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197616 Delhi HC addressed protection of the mark AGILENT against use in a business name and domain name, focusing on whether the mark qualified as a well-known trademark and whether the defendant's adoption was deceptively similar. The Court accepted that the plaintiffs had established long, continuous and extensive use, Indian registrations across multiple classes, and international reputation, bringing the mark within Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. It also noted the restriction under Section 20 of the Companies Act, 1956 against company names identical with or too nearly resembling an existing company name or registered trade mark. Injunctive relief followed, restraining use of AGILENT or any deceptively similar mark. en-us Wed, 06 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:39:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197616 Delhi HC addressed protection of the mark AGILENT against use in a business name and domain name, focusing on whether the mark qualified as a well-known trademark and whether the defendant's adoption was deceptively similar. The Court accepted that the plaintiffs had established long, continuous and extensive use, Indian registrations across multiple classes, and international reputation, bringing the mark within Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. It also noted the restriction under Section 20 of the Companies Act, 1956 against company names identical with or too nearly resembling an existing company name or registered trade mark. Injunctive relief followed, restraining use of AGILENT or any deceptively similar mark. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197616