SATNAM OVERSEAS versus SANT RAM & CO. & ANR.
Cogent reasons were given for extending the respondent's trademark rights from six cities to the entire State of Uttar Pradesh; imposing geographical restrictions would be unjust and create complications; orders of High Court are neither perverse nor arbitrary, and no interference is warranted by the Supreme Court.
- Parties
- Appellant: Satnam Overseas; Respondent: Sant Ram & Co.; Respondent: Shalini Kumar and D.S. Mahra
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 22 November 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Delhi High Court
- Outcome
- Appeals dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Trademark Rectification, Trademark Registration, Non User of Trademark, Geographical Limitation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Satnam Overseas
Appellant
Sant Ram & Co.
Respondent
Shalini Kumar and D.S. Mahra
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Delhi High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether restriction of use of trademark 'KOHINOOR' to six cities in Uttar Pradesh is justified
- 2 Whether extension of trademark use to entire State of Uttar Pradesh is arbitrary or perverse under Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958
Ratio Decidendi
Cogent reasons were given for extending the respondent's trademark rights from six cities to the entire State of Uttar Pradesh; imposing geographical restrictions would be unjust and create complications; orders of High Court are neither perverse nor arbitrary, and no interference is warranted by the Supreme Court.
Court Disposition
Appeals dismissed
Orders
- Order of Division Bench of Delhi High Court upheld
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment