Law: Trade Mark Act, 1940

Section: 57

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. XXXIX, rr. 1,2, 151

(a) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940), S. 57 read with Civil Pro cedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, rr. 1 & 2 and S. 151-Trade mark, infringement of-Injunction-Appellant farm getting word "Tektronix" registered in respect of their electric or electronic goods and selling their goods, besides others, through firm P-Respondent an employee of firm P relieved from such service, setting up his own business under name of "Techtronics Corporation" as a distri butor of same goods as manufactured by appellant firm-Words "Tektronix" and "Techtronics" being pronounced alike, chances of confusion and deception in public mind, held, cannot be ruled out-Respondent having worked in firm dealing with appellant's goods could not feign ignorance and plead co-incidence in adopting his trading style-Respondent, held, rightly restrained from using trade name of "Techtronics Corporation." The words "Tektronix" and "Techtronics" admittedly are pronounced alike. "The iniquity of oblivion blindly scattereth her poppy", and the vagaries of human memory being, what they are, the chances of confusion and deception fin the public mind, prima facie cannot be ruled out. The word "Tektronix" appears to tie distinctive and not descrip tive. The respondent, having worked in the firm handling appellant's goods, could not feign ignorance about it. The adoption of Techtronics, therefore, as his trading style for operating the same business could not be just a coincidence. This could not be allowed, as the law stands. F. Woolworth do Co. Ltd. v. Woolworths (Australia) Ltd. 47 R P C 337; Southern Music Publishing Co. Ltd. v. Southern Song Ltd; 1966 R P C 137; Suhner & Co. A. G. v. Suhner Ltd. and others 1967 R P C 336; Office Cleaning Services Ltd. v. Westminster Window and General Cleaners Ltd. 63 R P C 39; Hawtin (E. V.) Ltd. v. Hawtin (John F.) & Co. Ltd. 1960 R P C 95: Hennessy & Co. v. Keating 24 R P C 485; Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd. v. Dunlop Motor Company Ltd. 24 R P C 572; Bravingtons Ltd. v. Barrington Tennant 74 R P C 183; Tavener Butleage Ltd. v. Specters Ltd. 74 R P C 498…