<?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>1982 (4) TMI 295 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199879</link>
    <description>The defendant&#039;s numeral mark and wrapper were found prima facie deceptively similar to the plaintiff&#039;s well-known soap wrapper, having regard to the get-up, colour scheme, layout and lettering arrangement, and were likely to confuse consumers in trade. On that basis, the Court held that interim protection was warranted for infringement of the registered trade marks and copyright, as well as passing off. It further held that, in a composite suit, its undisputed jurisdiction under Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 enabled it to grant interlocutory relief covering the trade mark and copyright claims despite the territorial jurisdiction objection. Interim injunction restraining manufacture, sale, advertising and dealing in the impugned goods was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 15:40:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (4) TMI 295 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199879</link>
      <description>The defendant&#039;s numeral mark and wrapper were found prima facie deceptively similar to the plaintiff&#039;s well-known soap wrapper, having regard to the get-up, colour scheme, layout and lettering arrangement, and were likely to confuse consumers in trade. On that basis, the Court held that interim protection was warranted for infringement of the registered trade marks and copyright, as well as passing off. It further held that, in a composite suit, its undisputed jurisdiction under Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 enabled it to grant interlocutory relief covering the trade mark and copyright claims despite the territorial jurisdiction objection. Interim injunction restraining manufacture, sale, advertising and dealing in the impugned goods was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>