Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Despite Respondent 1’s endeavour to create distinctions, it is crystal clear that the marks are confusingly/deceptively similar to the petitioner’s registered trade mark. Such use of a similar mark would invariably mislead consumers and members into believing that the goods under the impugned mark were sourced from the petitioner.

rajasthan high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Impugned order passed on the application for temporary injunction is discretionary in nature and until and unless the same suffer from arbitrariness, perversity or grave illegality, which leads to miscarriage of justice, such order does not warrant interference by the Appellate Court.”