- Case number
- CMA(TM) 12/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- N. Seshasayee
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
Phonetic similarity was accepted, and yet it was held too early to decide whether the mark would be deceptively similar, because the Registry had not decided the question on any opposition but had only exercised its authority at the stage of scrutinising the application under section 11.
Disposition
Set aside and remanded. The Registry to continue processing the application from the stage where it was left.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.