<?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>1970 (8) TMI 99 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288275</link>
    <description>The court found in favor of the plaintiff in a passing off case involving the trademarks &quot;MOTI&quot; and &quot;SACHA MOTI.&quot; The plaintiff established a prima facie case showing the distinctiveness of the &quot;MOTI&quot; mark through significant sales and market recognition. The court determined that the defendant&#039;s use of &quot;SACHA MOTI&quot; was likely to cause confusion among consumers due to phonetic and visual similarities, granting an injunction to restrain the defendant from using the mark without sufficient differentiation and awarding costs to be determined. The decision underscored the importance of safeguarding established trademarks against deceptive imitations to prevent consumer confusion and protect business goodwill.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 May 2020 12:24:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (8) TMI 99 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288275</link>
      <description>The court found in favor of the plaintiff in a passing off case involving the trademarks &quot;MOTI&quot; and &quot;SACHA MOTI.&quot; The plaintiff established a prima facie case showing the distinctiveness of the &quot;MOTI&quot; mark through significant sales and market recognition. The court determined that the defendant&#039;s use of &quot;SACHA MOTI&quot; was likely to cause confusion among consumers due to phonetic and visual similarities, granting an injunction to restrain the defendant from using the mark without sufficient differentiation and awarding costs to be determined. The decision underscored the importance of safeguarding established trademarks against deceptive imitations to prevent consumer confusion and protect business goodwill.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288275</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>