Bombay High Court Declines To Restrain Use Of ‘ANNA’ Trademark, Cites Plaintiff’s Stand Of Dissimilarity During Registration Stage

Case: Shantapa alias Shantesh S. Kalasgond v. Ms. Anna

Coram: Justice Sandeep V Marne

Case No.: Appeal From Order No. 915 of 2023

Court Observation: “I am of the view that the stand taken by a party in proceedings for registration of a Mark cannot be ignored in each and every proceeding filed for infringement or passing off. In the present case, the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel would fully apply where Plaintiff has twice made a representation before the Trademark Registry that there is no resemblance between his and the Defendant’s Marks. He took that stand with full knowledge that Defendant was intending to use the Mark ‘ANNA’ for same class of goods and services”.

Previous Posts

Calcutta High Court Quashes Case Against Village-Level Entrepreneur Accused Of Siphoning Funds Allotted Under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana

Sukesh Chandrashekhar Extortion Case: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To 69-Yr-Old Accused In MCOCA, PMLA Cases

Fire Insurance | Exact Cause Of Fire Immaterial If Insured Was Not Responsible For Initiating Fire: Supreme Court

Gauhati High Court Acquits Man Accused Of Killing Mother & Injuring Brother, Says Incriminating Circumstances Were Not Conclusively Proved

Marriage Does Not Eclipse Right To Individual Privacy, Autonomy: Karnataka High Court On Wife’s RTI Seeking Husband’s Aadhar Details

Previous Posts

Bombay High Court Declines To Restrain Use Of ‘ANNA’ Trademark, Bombay High Court Declines To Restrain Use Of ‘ANNA’ Trademark, Cites Plaintiff’s Stand Of Dissimilarity During Registration Stage