<?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>2000 (2) TMI 878 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305050</link>
    <description>The Delhi High Court set aside the judgment and remanded the case for trial in a trade mark infringement and passing off goods suit. The Court clarified that such suits can be filed against any party involved in the infringement chain, not just the manufacturer. It was ruled that the production of cash memos is not necessary initially, and territorial jurisdiction can be determined later with evidence. The appeal was disposed of with no costs due to the respondent&#039;s absence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2022 13:12:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 878 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305050</link>
      <description>The Delhi High Court set aside the judgment and remanded the case for trial in a trade mark infringement and passing off goods suit. The Court clarified that such suits can be filed against any party involved in the infringement chain, not just the manufacturer. It was ruled that the production of cash memos is not necessary initially, and territorial jurisdiction can be determined later with evidence. The appeal was disposed of with no costs due to the respondent&#039;s absence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>