Dabur v s baidyanath
The Plaintiffs must also establish, prima facie, reputation and the plaintiffs must also, prima facie, show that the trade dress of the defendants is likely to deceive or cause confusion. The said no objection certificate dated 20th August, which is in the shape of assignment.
Confusion is writ large as to source and origin as the difference in name will not make any difference to such a customer and the goods of the defendant can easily be passed off as goods of the plaintiff. It is alleged by the plaintiff that if the explanation given by the defendants was bonafide, the defendants would not have been using new packaging but ought to have used the earlier packagings used which is also in black colour for whichthe plaintiff has no objection wherein similar colour combination or feature of fire was not used by the defendant.
However, lack of a killer instinct in ayurvedic industry, lack of optimum therapeutics and stringent regulations are some of the key barrier which is limiting the market size.
The answer is no doubt one of degree and will depend on the evidence. No justification was given by the defendant as how to hit upon the new packaging which his similar to the packaging of the plaintiff.
Dabur or baidyanath chyawanprash
I am of the view that as far as other contentions raised by the defendants are concerned, those issues require trial and cannot be gone into at this stage. In the pleadings Plaintiff does not claim that the work has been assigned to the Plaintiff, however, there is a solitary and oblique reference in the "no objection certificate" dated 20th August, that the work has been assigned to the Plaintiff, "by way of abundant caution". However, the overall availability of many herbs and plants has drastically reduced, leading to problems. The two marks "Vicco" and "Cosmo" used by the plaintiffs and defendants respectively are no doubt different and the mark "Cosmo" by itself is not likely to deceive but the entire get up and the colour scheme of the tube and the carton adopted by the plaintiffs and the defendants are identical in every detail and are likely to confuse and deceive the customer easily. Specters Ld. Abhishek Malhotra, Adv. The 3, sq ft factory in Kolkata doubled up as both office and residence for Ram Dayal Joshi. Even in the New Trade Mark Act the definition of the mark is given in Section 2 m which says that "Mark" include a device, brand, style, label, ticket, name, signature, word, letter, numeral, shape of goods, packaging or combination of colours or any combination thereof. It is true it is the life blood of free enterprise system. It is submitted by the plaintiff that the defendant deliberately is trying to pass off its goods as those of the plaintiff. Along with the list of documents, the plaintiff has filed the original no objection certificate dated 20th August, issued by Mr Subhashish Dutta of Mudra India Pvt. Mamta R. No justification was given by the defendant as how to hit upon the new packaging which his similar to the packaging of the plaintiff.
To combat this, the team is closely working with several doctors and researchers to ensure that there are different alternatives to a few ingredients that make the medicine.
Plaintiff has filed no objection certificate in relation to the carton created on The plaintiff has also filed the prima facie evidence in support of his submission made in para 12 of the plaint.
Dabur vs patanjali ashwagandha
So, what did Patanjali that started in as a small pharmacy in the holy town of Haridwar do differently? Plaintiff Through Mr. The retail footprint comprises over 7,00, stores, 5, franchisees, 11 manufacturing facilities and exports to over 35 countries. It was August 8, , and Ram Dayal was wondering why his workers were in office while everyone else was participating in the Quit India movement. Plaintiff has filed no objection certificate in relation to the carton created on It would be too much to expect that persons dealing with trade marked goods, and relying, as they frequently do, upon marks, should be able to remember the exact details of the marks upon the goods with which they are in the habit of dealing. It is alleged by the defendant that though the plaintiff claims that it has been selling the Shilajit Gold product since , however, in its own CS OS No. The only way to make these medicines is through expertise. Again, the White circle with grey lettering is identically super-imposed on violet background. Essentials of the cause of action The plaintiff must prove that the disputed name, mark, sign or get up has become distinctive of his goods in the sense that by the use of his name or mark, etc in relation to goods they are regarded, by a substantial number of members of the public or in the trade, as coming from a particular source, known or unknown; it is not necessary that the name of the plaintiff's firm should be known Mamta R. The object of the interlocutory injunction, it is stated, is to protect the plaintiff against injury by violation of his rights for which he could not adequately by compensated in damages recoverable in the action if the uncertainty were resolved in his favour at the trial.
Sudhir Bhatia and Ors. Once an idea is written down, the writing becomes the subject matter of copyright.
based on 11 review