| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 2235 2000 SLD 2235 = 2000 PLD 139 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 73 of 1995 in Suit No.14 of 1995 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 1906 of1998 in Suit No. 227 of 1998, decided on 21st May, 1999
M. SHAIQ USMANI, J
Sharif-ud-Din Pirzada with Hassan Irfan Khan for Plaintiffs (in Suit No. 14 of 1995). Khalil Qazilbash for Defendants (in Suit No. 14 of 1995). Hassan Irfan Khan for Plaintiffs (in Suit No. 227 of 1998). Khalil Qazilbash for Defendants (in Suit No. 227 of
Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 73 of 1995 in Suit No.14 of 1995 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 1906 of1998 in Suit No. 227 of 1998, decided on 21st May, 1999
M. SHAIQ USMANI, J
Sharif-ud-Din Pirzada with Hassan Irfan Khan for Plaintiffs (in Suit No. 14 of 1995). Khalil Qazilbash for Defendants (in Suit No. 14 of 1995). Hassan Irfan Khan for Plaintiffs (in Suit No. 227 of 1998). Khalil Qazilbash for Defendants (in Suit No. 227 of
DABUR INDIA LTD.--Plaintiffvs HILAL CONFECTIONERY (PVT.) LTD. --Defendant
Law: Copyrights Ordinance, 1962
Section: 54
Law: Trade Marks Act, (V of 1940)
Section: 21,20(2)
(a) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940)-------Ss. 20 & 73---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), OXXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Registration of trade mark---Interim injunction, grant of---Registered trade mark was assailed by the petitioner on the ground of infringement--�Validity---Once a trade mark had been registered the proprietor had exclusive right to its use because if it were otherwise then there would be no purpose in registration of a trade mark in the first instance---Registration of trade mark did not constitute final appropriation of the mark and the same could be challenged either in appeal or under the provisions of Trade Marks Act, 1940---Use of a trade mark by a registered proprietor could not be regarded as infringement of the mark, till the, time such mark was rectified or cancelled---Interim injunction was not granted in circumstances.(b) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940)--�----Preamble---Expression "passing off" as used in Trade Marks Act, 1940--�Connotation and applicability---Passing off in the traditional sense is primarily concerned with -unfair competition between the traders---Question of deception of the public which may be caused by passing off the goods is not of that importance because passing off action, is normally not an action which is brought by a member of the public on the ground that such person was deceived but it is brought by the . traders because such trader fears that his trade will suffer from the deception that is being practised on the public--- "Passing off" is a question of trade rivalry rather than of deception and a case of dishonesty inasmuch as another party tries to take advantage of the efforts and the expenditure made and incurred in developing a product by another party.1987 SCMR 1090 ref.(c) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940)-------Preamble---Expression "spill over advertisement" ---Connotation--�Concept of spill over advertisement is that it is not a direct advertisement but one finds its way amongst people in different lands through media.William Grant & Sons v. McDowell & Co. Ltd. 1994 FSR 690 ref.(d) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940)-------Preamble---Expression "unfair trade" and "unfair…