Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 360 2005 SLD 360 2005 CLD 808
Lahore High Court
Commercial Appeal No.16 of 2002, decision dated: 21st March, 2005. dates of hearing: 14th, 15th and 16-02-2005
ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, JUSTICE
Syed Zafar Ali Shah for Appellant. Mujtaba Jamal for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Nasrullah Khan for
Respondent No. 3.

MESSRS DARSON INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD.

VS

Law: Companies Ordinance, 1984

Section: 37

(a) Companies Ordinance (LXVII of 1984)--Ss. 37 & 38---Registered name of company---Similarity in name of companies---Criteria---Company should not be registered by a name identical with that by which a company in existence is already registered, or so nearly resembling that name as to be calculated to deceive public--­Such criteria is to protect persons, who may be coming in contact with such company, from believing that the source and origin of the new company was that of an existing company and that no confusion in that regard is caused---In case of many companies some portion of similarity in name has been allowed to co-exist and the determining factor in each case is one of the facts depending on the amount of confusion involved---For such similarity, each case has its own history and merits---There are many corporations which are household words, manufacturing different types of goods and indulging in various kinds of trades---Such corporations may have common names and may have uncommon names---Corporations with common names can be shown laxity provided their name is prefixed and suffixed with certain other identity which may reduce the chance of deception---In case of uncommon name, the chances of deception are larger and customer can always be deceived from the name rather than from what the company may be trading in. (b) Trade Marks Act (V of 1940)--- ----Ss. 8(a) & 10(1)---Registered name of company--­Similarity in name of companies---Criteria---Similarity in trade mark should not be such that an unwary purchaser should not be allowed to believe that the goods of a party and the opposing party came from the same source­. (c) Security and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997)--- ----S.34---Companies Ordinance (LXVII of 1984), Ss. 37 & 38---Resemblance in names of companies---Permissible extent---Principles---Appellant company was registered under the name of Messrs Darson Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. whereas the respondent company was registered subsequently under the name of Messrs Darson (Pvt.) Ltd.--­Both the companies were in different business---Appellant company was aggrieved of the similarity in the name of the respondent…
🔒
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