OFFENCES AND PENALTIES UNDER THE TRADEMARKS ACT, 1999

 

OFFENCES AND PENALTIES UNDER THE TRADEMARKS ACT, 1999

Section 114 

•       specifies the offences committed by companies under the act. If a company creates a trademark that is closely similar to the same, of another company, and it creates confusion among consumers, if not prove their innocence or their unawareness, they will be deemed to be guilty of Trademark Infringement and are liable to be penalised accordingly. 

Penalties for Trademark Infringement:-

  1. Section 103: If a person is found to falsify any pre-existing trademarks or trade descriptions and applies to their own goods or services, they are to be punished with imprisonment for a term of six months to three years, along with a fine of fifty thousand rupees to two lakh rupees.
  2. Section 104: The same punishment mentioned right above would be awarded to a person if he is found to sell, hire goods or services to which false trade marks or descriptions are applied.

•       Section 105: If a person previously convicted of the offences prescribed in sections 103 and 104 is again found guilty for those offences, he will be punishable for every subsequent offence with a jail term of one year to three years and a fine from one lakh extending upto two lakhs.

  1. Section 106: If any person removes or attempts to remove for sale from any premises referred to in section 81, or sells or exposes for sale or has in his possession for sale or for any purpose of trade or manufacture piece goods or cotton yarn or cotton thread that is not marked as required by that section, every such piece and every such bundle of yarn and all such thread, as well as everything used for the packing thereof, shall be forfeited to the Government and will be fined up to one thousand rupees.
  2. Section 107: No person is allowed to make a false representation of a trademark as legally registered, and if found to be guilty, he will be punished with imprisonment for up to three years or asked to pay a fine or sometimes even both.
  3. Section 108: If a person is found to mislead that his place of business is in official connection with the Trade Marks Office, he will be punishable with a jail term extending up to two years, or with a fine, or both.
  4. Section 109: If a person falsely makes entries in the register, then he shall be punished with imprisonment extending to two years, with a fine, or both.

•       Famous Case Laws:-

•       Coca-Cola Company vs. Bisleri International Pvt Ltd: In this case, the plaintiff made a contention that the defendant had infringed their trademark within and outside the territorial jurisdiction where the brand trades in. The defendant was found to use the trademark MAAZA outside India. But the court held that the proprietor possesses and retains all rights to the trademark. The court has issued an interim injunction against the defendant, ordering them to cease all manufacture and use of the Trademark MAAZA with immediate effect because they no longer have any rights to the trademark after signing the Deed of Assignment with the plaintiff.

•       Sony Corporation vs. K. Selvamurthy: In this case, the defendant Mr. Selvamurthy was running a travel business named Sony Tours and Travels. The plaintiff, Sony Corporation filed a suit of trademark infringement against the business claiming that the business is taking unfair advantage of its reputation. The Court came to a decision that since Sony Corporation’s business is restricted to electronics and media, as opposed to the Defendant’s tours and trips business, the defendant hadn’t taken any advantage of their reputation or fame. The Court further observed that Defendant’s use of the name “Sony” did not seem to cause misunderstandings among the consumer. It further noted Plaintiff’s excessive delay in reaching the Court and awarded the Defendants costs of Rs. 25,000/-

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

JOINT PROMISORS AND THE NATURE OF THEIR LIABILITY

  JOINT PROMISORS AND THE NATURE OF THEIR LIABILITY Sections 42, 43 and 44 of the Contract Act deal with the question of liability of the joint promisors. The following rules are contained in these Sections: The liability of the joint promisors is joint and several When two or more persons make a joint promise, the promisee may, in the absence of express agreement to the contrary, compel or more of such joint promisors to perform the whole of the promise. It depends on the discretion of the promisee as to which of the promisors are to be made liable for the whole of the promise. If one of the promisors is sued to meet the whole of the claim, he cannot say that as between different promisors, his liability is for a part of the promise only. For example, A, B and C jointly promise to pay D 3,000 rupees. D may compel either A or B or C to pay him 3,000 rupees. If two or more persons jointly take a lease, and their liability to pay the rent is joint and several under Section 43...
Read more
  List of Forms and Sections in Trademark Compiled by Ridhima Dixit ( https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/trademark-forms-india-per-rules-2007-riddhima-dixit/ )   As per the earlier provisions of law so prescribed under the Trademark Rules, 2002, there were 75 different kinds of forms for the various procedures relating to the trademark filing and registration. However, as per the proposed amendment, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry had issued the Trademark (Amendment) Rules, 2017. In the new set of rules, the number of forms were reduced to 8, to simplify and streamline the whole trademark filing and prosecution process. These forms are available online and are easy to access even by a layman, who does not have any knowledge on how to apply for a trademark protection. The purpose of each form is, thereby, very essential to be understood properly. 1.         TM- A  (‘Application for registration of a trademark’) This form...
Read more

CONTINGENT CONTRACTS

  CONTINGENT CONTRACTS What is a contingent contract According to Section 31, a contingent contract is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract, does not happen. When the contract is dependent or conditional upon the happening or non-happening of a certain future event, the contract is contingent. For example, A contracts to pay B Rs. 10,000 if B's house is burnt, this is a contingent contract. (Illustration to Section 31). The payment of the amount is contingent on the happening of a collateral event, i.e., the burning of the house. All contracts of insurance or indemnity aim at payment of money only after a certain event happens, or the loss is caused, and, therefore, they are contingent contracts. A wagering agreement is also a contingent contract, but that type of contingent contract has been specifically declared to be void by Section 30. A distinction is to be drawn between a contract under which a present obligation is created...
Read more