-
Recent Posts
- Magistrate can vary an order under Section 125 Cr.PC: SC
- CPC Order XXVII Rule 8A ‘archaic’, no exceptional treatment for Government: SC
- No Unfair Trade Practice from Star and Airtel: SC
- Commercial wisdom of CoC is not subject to adjudicating authority purview: SC
- NRIs have right to possess property in Punjab/Chandigarh: SC
Recent Comments
Archives
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
Categories
- Administrative Law
- Arbitration Conciliation Law
- Banking Law
- Civil Aviation
- Civil Law
- Company Law
- Competition Law
- Constitution Law
- Consumer Law
- Contract Law
- Criminal Law
- crpc
- customs law
- Drugs Law
- Election Law
- Employment Law
- Environment Law
- Evidence Law
- Excise Law
- Family Law
- FDI
- General Law
- Immigration
- Income Tax Law
- india immigration law
- information technology law
- Insolvency & Bankruptcy Law
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property Law
- inter
- International Law
- Labor Law
- mediation
- Motor Vehicle Law
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- noti
- Notifications/Publications/Circulars
- patent
- patent law
- plant varieties Act
- Privacy Law
- Real Estate
- Registration & Stamp Law
- RTI
- Sales Tax
- Securities Law
- Service Tax
- Telecommunications Law
- tort law
- Trade Law
- trademark
- traditional knowledge
- TRIPS
- Uncategorized
- US Immigration Law
- WTO/GATT
Meta
Tag Archives: tenable
Prior permission not necessary for rectification of registered trademark: DHC
In an important ruling, the Delhi High Court clarified that prior permission of the Court is not necessary under Section 124(1)(b)(ii) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (“Act”) for rectification of a registered trademark during the pendency of a suit. … Continue reading →
Posted in Intellectual Property Law, International Law, patent, patent law, plant varieties Act, Trade Law, trademark, traditional knowledge, TRIPS
|
Tagged 125, 1999, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 57, Act, advocate, agreement, amendment, appeal, appellate, article, authority, bench, bill, board, code, complaint, court, criminal, delhi, dhingra, dsl, dslegal, dslegal.com, duggal, facie, firm, foreign, full, government, high court, india, information, intellectual, ipab, jain, law, madras, month, offence, pavan, penalty, pendency, permission47, prima, prior, procedure, property, rectification, registered, rules, section124, singh, stay, suit, supreme, tenable, three, trademark, USA
|
Leave a comment
Dhingra & Singh 