- Case number
- C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 164/2021
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Sanjeev Narula
- Outcome
- Set aside
Headnote
The companion appeal. There were hardly any differences between the refused device mark and the applicant's own registered formative marks, which carried the same logo and the same distinctive word, and both of those are prominent features of the mark refused. The objection that it lacked distinctiveness could not stand.
Disposition
Allowed. Impugned order set aside; the Registry directed to process the application.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.