LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

taranpreet (student)     08 March 2013

Sec29(2) of trademarkact

Refering to sec29 of TM Act ,words Identical and Similar trademarks has been used.

My query is considering Identical as subset of Similar trademarks ,as Identical denoting quite high degree of resemblence as compared to similar, is it not that sec29(2)a and sec 29(2)c redundant ,because all the cases of infringement coming under sec29(2)a and sec29(2)c would surely be covered under sec29(2)b?



 1 Replies

BHAVYA SOM GARG   28 August 2021

Greetings of the day. On the basis of the facts provided by you, I wish to tell you that you are right, but only partially. While you are correct in assessing that the word identity denotes a higher degree of resemblance than the word ‘similarity’. But you are not wholly correct in assuming that sections 29(2)(a), 29(2)(b), 29(2)(c) denote the same meaning and that clauses (a) and (c) are redundant as all the cases can be covered under clause (b). You must know that each clause contains a separate situation, with the degree of infringement going in ascending order. Section 29(2)(a) covers the situation wherein the opposing trademark highly resembles the registered trademark, but the goods being dealt under the two trademarks resemble a lesser degree. Section 29(2)(b) covers the situation wherein the opposing trademark moderately resembles the registered trademark, but the goods being dealt under the two trademarks resemble a moderate to a higher degree. Section 29(2)(c) covers the situation wherein the opposing trademark highly resembles the registered trademark, and the goods being dealt under the two trademarks also resemble a higher degree. These are three different situations, and as we can see, section 29(2)(c) contains the most serious infringement, wherein both the trademark and the goods being dealt with are highly similar, which might even fall under the category of deceptive similarity of goods and the customer may buy a fake good believing it to be that of the original one. The court would determine the penalty accordingly. Hope it satisfies the query.

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads

LCI Learning Hindu Laws


Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query