9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (2) TMI 476X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation made by the appellant herein in August 1981 under Under Section 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 herein after referred to as the Act) was rejected. The case of the appellants as made out before the trial Court was that the appellants were the proprietors of the duly registered trade mark being the mark 'RAJA' being Nos. 144, 388 as of July 11, 1950 in Class 7. Accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent is deceptively similar to that of the petitioner. Further it has been pointed out that the said mark has been in simultaneous use with the mark of the petitioner for about 3 years. The said products are special products not intended to be used by the general public or to be purchased with casual frequency. 3. Against the same this appeal has been preferred. We have examined the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. Having regard to the nature of the persons purchasing the property, nature of the products and the nature of display, we are of the opinion that the learned Judge was right in dismissing this application. However, in order to make the position further clear we propose certain further safeguards to which the learned Advocates appearing for the parties have no objection. The respondent shall mak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
