Lupin Ltd. v. Johnson & Johnson and Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd. v. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. Bombay High Court (Full Bench) Date of decision: 23.12.2014 Issue: “Whether the Court can go into the question of the validity of the registration of the plaintiff’s trade mark at an interlocutory stage when the defendant takes up theContinue reading “Lupin Ltd. v. Johnson & Johnson and Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd. v. Parle Products Pvt. Ltd.”
Tag Archives: Section 28
Rules for Interpretation of Contracts: Pre-Contractual Documents/Draft Agreements
Antecedent Agreements A concluded antecedent agreement may be relied upon in interpreting a later contract in pursuance of that agreement. However, an antecedent agreement may be considered only on the basis of its particular facts and circumstances. Pre-Contractual Documents/Draft Agreements A concluded contract may be preceded by multiple drafts. Draft agreements may even be signed. DraftContinue reading “Rules for Interpretation of Contracts: Pre-Contractual Documents/Draft Agreements”
RAJ KUMAR PRASAD & ANR. v. ABBOTT HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD.
RAJ KUMAR PRASAD & ANR. v. ABBOTT HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD. 10.09.2014 In the High Court of Delhi FAO (OS) No. 281 of 2014 The Question “Whether a registered proprietor of a trademark can sue another registered proprietor of a trademark alleging deceptive similarity ?” came up before consideration before the Division Bench of the High Court.Continue reading “RAJ KUMAR PRASAD & ANR. v. ABBOTT HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD.”
Manohar Singh and Sons Vs. Raksha Karamchari Coop. Gr. H. Soc. and Anr.
Manohar Singh and Sons Vs. Raksha Karamchari Coop. Gr. H. Soc. and Anr. MANU/DE/3478/2009 FACTS Respondent-cooperative society (“R“) floated a tender for construction of flats, and the work was awarded to petitioner-contractor (“P“) through an agreement . The Architect certified P’s final bill for an amount of Rs. 9,47,043 along with a sum of Rs.Continue reading “Manohar Singh and Sons Vs. Raksha Karamchari Coop. Gr. H. Soc. and Anr.”
Wipro Cyprus Private Limited v. Zeetel Electronics
Wipro Cyprus Private Limited v. Zeetel Electronics 2010 (44) PTC 307 (Mad) Key Words: parallel import, exhaustion, trade mark, FACTS: The Appellant in this case filed a suit for permanent injunction, restraining the Respondents from using the trade mark YARDLEY or any other phonetically similar expression in any media which can infringe the Applicant’s registeredContinue reading “Wipro Cyprus Private Limited v. Zeetel Electronics”
N.R. Dongre and Ors. vs. Whirlpool Corpn. and Anr.
N.R. Dongre and Ors. vs. Whirlpool Corpn. and Anr. 1996 PTC (16) 583 (SC) FACTS The Whirlpool Corporation, i.e. the Plaintiff No. 1 is a multinational corporation incorporated in U.S.A. and had an established business in the manufacture, sale, distribution and servicing of washing machines of all kinds. Plaintiff No. 1 is the successor ofContinue reading “N.R. Dongre and Ors. vs. Whirlpool Corpn. and Anr.”
Indian Case Law 