TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andise Marks Act, 1958. This aspect was taken note of by the Tribunal that the trade mark need not necessarily be in respect of all goods unless registration has been so acquired and it is therefore, permissible in law to have same brand name for different classes of goods owned by different person, and in that background found in favour of the respondent and held that the Notification No. 223/87- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal. Therefore, the order made by the Tribunal cannot be made applicable to M/s. Dhanvi Trading Investments Pvt. Ltd. at all. In that view of the matter the order made by the Tribunal insofar as M/s. Dhanvi Trading Investments Pvt. Ltd. is concerned is set aside and the matter shall stand remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of all goods unless registration has been so acquired and it is therefore, permissible in law to have same brand name for different classes of goods owned by different person, and in that background found in favour of the respondent and held that the Notification No. 223/87-C.E., dated 22-9-1987 was applicable. When as a matter of fact it is held that there was an assignment in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
