https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198703 In assessing deceptive similarity under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, the relevant enquiry is whether the rival mark, taken as a whole, is likely to deceive or cause confusion, rather than whether it differs only on microscopic comparison. Applying that test, "Medisprin" was found visually, phonetically and structurally distinct from "Disprin". The Court also noted that the products differed in nature, use, packing, price and mode of marketing, and that the Schedule H status of the defendants' product reduced the likelihood of confusion. On that basis, no infringement or passing off was established and interim restraint was refused. en-us Tue, 21 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198703 In assessing deceptive similarity under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, the relevant enquiry is whether the rival mark, taken as a whole, is likely to deceive or cause confusion, rather than whether it differs only on microscopic comparison. Applying that test, "Medisprin" was found visually, phonetically and structurally distinct from "Disprin". The Court also noted that the products differed in nature, use, packing, price and mode of marketing, and that the Schedule H status of the defendants' product reduced the likelihood of confusion. On that basis, no infringement or passing off was established and interim restraint was refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198703