AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999


67. Relief in suit for infringement or for passing off.-

1.     The relief which a court may grant in any suit for infringement or for passing off referred to in section 66 includes injunction (subject to such terms, if any, as the court thinks fit) and at t e option of the plaintiff, either damages or account of profits, together with or without any order for the delivery-up of the infringing labels and indications for destruction or erasure.

2.     The order of injunction under sub-section (1) may include an ex parte injunction or any interlocutory order for any of the following matters, namely:-

a.     for discovery of documents;

b.    preserving of infringing goods, documents or other evidence which are related to the subject-matter of the suit;

c.     restraining the defendant from disposing of or dealing with his assets in a manner which may adversely affect plaintiff's ability to recover damages, costs or other pecuniary remedies which may be finally awarded to the plaintiff.

3.     Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the court shall not grant relief by way of damages (other than nominal damages) on account of profits in any case-

a.     where in a suit for infringement the defendant satisfies the court-

                      i.        that at the time he commenced to use the geographical indication complained of in the suit he was unaware and had no reasonable ground for believing that the geographical indication of the plaintiff was on the register; and

                     ii.        that when he became aware of the existence and nature of the plaintiff's right in the geographical indication, he forthwith ceased to use the geographical indication in relation to good in respect of which it was registered; or

b.    where in a suit for passing off, the defendant satisfies the court-

                      i.        that at the time he commenced to use the geographical indication complained of in the suit he was unaware and had no reasonable ground for believing that the geographical indication relating to the plaintiff was in use; and

                     ii.        that when he became aware of the existence and nature of the geographical indication relating to the plaintiff he forthwith ceased to use the geographical indication complained of.



Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered by nubia  |  driven by neosys