<?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>2013 (2) TMI 844 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197869</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a trademark infringement and passing off case. The defendant&#039;s use of a name similar to the plaintiffs&#039; registered trademark was deemed to infringe upon their rights. A permanent injunction was granted, barring the defendant from using any name resembling the trademark. The court emphasized the prohibition on registering companies with names similar to existing trademarks under the Companies Act, 1956. A three-month compliance period was provided, and the plaintiffs were authorized to take necessary actions in case of non-compliance by the defendant. No costs were awarded due to the defendant&#039;s non-appearance in court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:14:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504867" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 844 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197869</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a trademark infringement and passing off case. The defendant&#039;s use of a name similar to the plaintiffs&#039; registered trademark was deemed to infringe upon their rights. A permanent injunction was granted, barring the defendant from using any name resembling the trademark. The court emphasized the prohibition on registering companies with names similar to existing trademarks under the Companies Act, 1956. A three-month compliance period was provided, and the plaintiffs were authorized to take necessary actions in case of non-compliance by the defendant. No costs were awarded due to the defendant&#039;s non-appearance in court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>