Ritesh Rathod
12 October 2014 at 18:09
Dear sir, my question is - 1. Mr. X is a holder of particular Trademark now suppose mr. X had died and Mr x's near legal heir is Mr. Y. NOW Mr. X's intellectual property I.e TM how can Mr. Y can receive. In other word how can legal heir of deceased person aquired A intellectual property of deceased person? Which TM form I have to file and what documents are required along with application?
Thanks
cs Ritesh Rathod
Sarita Nakhe
08 October 2014 at 17:42
Can Educational Institutes, Housing Societies, Trusts use pirated and unlicensed software in their offices? What would be the consequences after using these pirated and unlicensed software?
Ajay Shukla
29 September 2014 at 09:58
A publisher published my book a few years back . An agreement was also signed. The copyrights were mine. The publisher did not follow the terms of the contract and never made any payment as per the terms. Now I want the same book to be published by another publisher. Does the old agreement still hold good ? can I freely get the book published by another publisher ? Does the existing publisher have any right over the book ?
Ajay Shukla
gaurav
28 September 2014 at 12:09
dear sir ,
i am planning to start tutorials for which i will have to make my own study materials for my students comipled from various sorces and also want to copyright my material.
i am from kolkata could you plz guide me how can i copyright my materials and cost involved
And MAINLY I WILL HAVE TO COPY/MODIFY SUMS ASKED IN PREVIOUS EXAMINATIONS SO TO WHAT EXTENT I CAN COPY.
PLZ HELP GENIUNLY AND URGENTLY REQUIRED.
TKN
28 September 2014 at 09:21
Dear Sir,
i was adopted by my father at the age of 1. My age is now 33. i am married having 2 children. He has a property in his name, where we all are staying right now.
The part of the property was legally sold to a temple trust. Now for the remaining property, my father wrote a settlement deed to me on Rs 100 stamp paper and also it is registered without my knowledge. In the deed he has mentioned that I am adopted from these persons and also the part that is given to temple trust.
Till now we didn't get patta for this property. Few questions on this
1. Please let me know is this valid settlement document ?
2. If I want to get patta in my name what is the process ?
3. Also regarding the part of the land registered to temple trust, will I get patta for the part of which I am staying right now ?
Please advice me
thanks
Reshma
27 September 2014 at 16:12
Hi, questions relates to Sec 45 (proviso) of Copyright Act and Rule 24(3) of the TM Rules.
1. We have some artisitic work which is included along with the source code. Now when we copyright this source code along with these artistic work, do we have to take certificate under Rule 24(3) for the artistic work included. We have no intention of using them as trade mark.
2. Does User interface / web page design get protected under source code copyright. Does UI need any other protection.
This has been causing great deal of confusion in the argument stage. Appreciate your help in this regard.
RATNAKAR KULKARNI
20 September 2014 at 10:51
Dear Sir,
Can as a secretary give NOC to member for release deed . The member is a mother of son and daughter and she has become a member by virtue of her husbands death; Now she wants to execute a release deed making her only son as full owner of the flat ; the daughter also wants release her rights;
Can the society transfer the flat to the son as per Byelaws of co-op hsg society
Thanks
suresh babu
18 September 2014 at 10:00
Sir, I have a doubt, please clarify that under mitakshara hindu law the property inherited by a hindu from his father, fathers father, or fathers fathers father is ancestral property to his son or daughter. whereas property inherited from other relations i.e from his brotheror uncle etc. is the seperate property.And also kindly refer to the supreme court judgement dated 15/07/2013 in a civil appeal no. 5475 of 2013 between rohit chauhan v/s surinder singh & ors.
clarify whether the HSA is applicable through out india or differ from state to state. I am from bangalore.And also there is a judgment from Delhi cort between Brij narain Aggarwal vs Anup kumar goyal & ors, ruling that the very first condition of the application of this amended provision is that on the day when amended act came into force, an HUF governed by mitakshara law must be in existance. if joint family is in existence on that day, the daughter shall be a coparcener as that of a son.
The above mentioned clarification is required for my query dated 3/9/14 with the experts reply from mr. Anirudh. mr. laxmikant koshi, mr. Kumar doab, mr. Dr.j.c vashista & mr. kalai selvan. Please dont mistake my query.I am little bit confused.
suresh babu
09 September 2014 at 11:46
Mr. anirudh yesterday i had posted a query, regarding my wifes rights, will you please reply the query, so that i can understand the law.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
I received an order. please explain me the same
GA No.3120 of 2014
CS No.358 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
PANGHAT SAREES PVT. LTD.
-Versus-
PANGHAT & ORS.
Appearance:
Mr. Ranjan Bachawat, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Debnath Ghosh, Adv.
...for the plaintiff.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
Date : 26th September, 2014.
The Court : Let the affidavit of service filed in Court
today be kept with the records.
In spite of service of this application, none has
appeared to oppose this application. The petitioner is claiming to
be the sole proprietor of 'Panghat'. It is stated that the
petitioner is the owner of the trademark Panghat Sarees and has
been continuing the same since 1999. It was initially in the name
of Nirmal Saraf and thereafter the private limited company was
formed in 2003. It is stated that the petitioner is the assignee
of the trademark Panghat from Nirmal Saraf, who is the promoter-
director of the company. On 30th January, 2014, on an application
filed by the petitioner, the trademark 'Panghat Sarees' have been
2
registered in the name of the petitioner in Class-24 under the
Trademarks Act, 1999. The petitioner has also filed an application
on 19th August, 2014 for registration of the wordmark "Panghat
Sarees" in Class-24 under the Trademarks Act, 1999 to protect its
exclusive proprietary right over the wordmark. In July, 2014, the
petitioner came to know that the respondents are trying to sell
sarees under an identical and deceptively similar mark "Panghat" from 127A, Park Street, Kolkata-700 017. Immediately, a cease and desist notice was issued on 20th August, 2014. Following such notice an e-mail was forwarded to the Advocate of the petitioner stating that the partnership firm was established on 1st April, 2010. A deed of partnership, executed by the partners, dated 1st April, 2010 was also forwarded to the Advocate-on-record of the petitioner. Although the wordmark has not been registered, but the fact remains that the labelmark namely, "Panghat Sarees" have been registered on 30th January, 2004 and the said registration is still valid and subsisting. It also appears that the volume of sale of the sarees of the petitioner has increased considerably from 2004-05. In such a situation, an obligation is cast upon the defendant to explain to the adoption of the wordmark "Panghat". In spite of notice the defendants are not represented. This Court is, prima facie, of the view that the petitioner has a strong prima facie case and the balance of convenience lies in favour of passing an ad interim order in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, there shall be an order in terms of prayer (b) of the petition.
The matter is made returnable on 3rd November, 2014. The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the respondents.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(SOUMEN SEN, J.) A/s.