https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198693 A plaintiff seeking interim relief in a passing off dispute must disclose the defendant's correct address for service and approach the court with clean hands; where the pleaded address was only that of a consignee agent and not the corporate defendant's registered office, the jurisdictional and service foundation failed and interim relief was refused. On the merits, the mark PIO was treated as publici juris because it described the active ingredient used commonly in similar pharmaceutical products, and the comparison with PIOZ did not establish deceptive similarity. The equitable injunction claim also failed because the plaintiff had suppressed the proper address, weakening its entitlement to discretionary relief. en-us Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:04:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198693 A plaintiff seeking interim relief in a passing off dispute must disclose the defendant's correct address for service and approach the court with clean hands; where the pleaded address was only that of a consignee agent and not the corporate defendant's registered office, the jurisdictional and service foundation failed and interim relief was refused. On the merits, the mark PIO was treated as publici juris because it described the active ingredient used commonly in similar pharmaceutical products, and the comparison with PIOZ did not establish deceptive similarity. The equitable injunction claim also failed because the plaintiff had suppressed the proper address, weakening its entitlement to discretionary relief. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198693