- Case number
- (T)CMA(TM) 194/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
- Outcome
- Set aside
Headnote
The threshold at the pre-advertisement stage is low. Where there is an arguable case that the goods to which the applicant applies its mark are not similar to those of the cited mark, rejection before advertisement is not justified, because a registered proprietor is entitled to protection only where an identical or similar mark is used in relation to identical or similar goods. The applicant also held the identical mark registered in two other classes.
Disposition
Allowed. Impugned order set aside; the application to be accepted for advertisement. Not binding on opponents.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.