It appears there's been a misunderstanding. The title provided, "Section 29 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999," is not a case title but rather a section of an Act. I need an actual case name to summarize it. I also need the court that heard the case and the date of the judgment.
However, I can provide a general explanation of Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which deals with infringement of registered trademarks:
General Explanation of Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999
Short Summary Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, defines what constitutes infringement of a registered trademark in India. It outlines various scenarios where the use of a mark by an unauthorized party can be considered an infringement, focusing on similarity, identity, and the potential for confusion.
Key Provisions Section 29 essentially states that a registered trademark is infringed when a person, without authorization, uses a mark that is:
Importance This section is crucial for trademark owners as it provides the legal basis for preventing others from using their trademarks or similar marks in a way that could harm their business or confuse consumers. It is the foundation upon which trademark infringement lawsuits are built.
Disclaimer: This is a general overview of Section 29 and should not be considered legal advice. Specific legal advice should be sought from a qualified attorney.
To provide a case summary, please provide the name of the case, the court, and the date of the judgment.
Get instant answers specific to this case