https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197868 Prior user or concurrent user of the mark "Cobra" was not proved because the claimant failed to establish use of the mark on the relevant goods since 1978; unverified sales statements and invoices showing only the mark's appearance, without proof that the goods themselves were identified by it, were insufficient. Registration was also barred by the respondent's earlier registered mark "Cobra" for electrical apparatus, because the goods were of the same description, shared the same trade channel, and use of an identical mark for voltage stabilizers was likely to confuse or deceive consumers. The refusal of registration was therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:07:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197868 Prior user or concurrent user of the mark "Cobra" was not proved because the claimant failed to establish use of the mark on the relevant goods since 1978; unverified sales statements and invoices showing only the mark's appearance, without proof that the goods themselves were identified by it, were insufficient. Registration was also barred by the respondent's earlier registered mark "Cobra" for electrical apparatus, because the goods were of the same description, shared the same trade channel, and use of an identical mark for voltage stabilizers was likely to confuse or deceive consumers. The refusal of registration was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197868