Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 2204 2014 SLD 2204 2014 CLD 1601
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 712 of 2009, decision dated: 15-05-2014.
MUNIB AKHTAR, J
Khurram Gul Ghory for Plaintiff. Taha Kamal for Defendants Nos.1 to 4 and 7.

RUPALI POLYESTER LIMITED through Attorney Authorized PersoN--PlaintiffvsBABA CHINA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS and 6 others----Defendants

Law:

Section:

Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001)-------Ss. 14, 17 & 80---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Infringement of trade mark---Interim injunction, grant of---Plaintiff company alleged that defendant construction company was using its name---Validity---Possible grounds for invalidity fell into two distinct parts, one in relation to S. 14 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 and the other in relation to S. 17 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, which provisions of law were found in chapter II of the statute---Provisions of S.14 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, listed the ground which must result in an application for registration being refused---Such were absolute grounds which apply regardless of whether there was any other trade mark in the field---On the other hand S.17 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, listed relative grounds, which applied in the main if there was another, earlier registered trade mark although S.17(4) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, related to an unregistered mark/right as well in the circumstances therein stated--- Application of defendants could not relate to anything contained in S.80(3) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001---None of the provisions of S.17 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, applied in relation to defendants' unregistered mark/right on the one hand and to the plaintiff's registered trade mark---Insofar as S.80(1) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, was concerned, that could apply, if at all, in relation to only one provision of S.14(4) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001---Trade marks should not be registered if or to the extent that application was made in bad faith---Plaintiff was not entitled to interim injunctive relief--- Application was dismissed in circumstances. Venkateswaran on Trade Marks and Passing-off, 5th edition, 2010; Rolled Steel Products (Holdings) Ltd. v. British Steel Corporation [1985] 3 All ER 52; Harrison v. Teton Valley Trading Co. Ltd. [2004] EWCA Civ 1028, [2005] FSR 10; Kerly's Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names, 14th Ed., 2005; Fry Consulting Pty Ltd. v. Sports Warehouse Inc. (No.2) [2012] FCA 81; Valentino Globe BV v. Pacific Rim Industries Inc. [2010] SGCA 14; Royal Enfield Trade Marks [2002] RPC 24…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492