2010 SCMR 95 (PLP)
ROZNAMA HAMDARD through Chief Editor — Petitioner Versus HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION PAKISTAN-Respondent
| Citation | 2010 SCMR 95 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and M. Javed Buttar, JJ |
| Parties | ROZNAMA HAMDARD through Chief Editor — Petitioner Versus HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION PAKISTAN-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 SCMR 95 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 SCMR 95 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and M. Javed Buttar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 SCMR 95 (PLP) (ROZNAMA HAMDARD through Chief Editor — Petitioner Versus HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION PAKISTAN-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ishtiaq Ahmad Raja, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Sultan Ahmad Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from judgment of the Islamabad High Court Islamabad dated 30-7-2008 passed in R.F.A. No.8 of 2008).
S. 40(4)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Petitioner intended to use name "The Daily Hamdard" for newspaper to be published by it
Respondent was owner of registered trade mark known as "Hamdard" renowned in the field of Unani medicines, syrups and other goods-Respondent assailed the name of petitioner on the ground that it was already publishing magazines and journals under the name and title of "Hamdard-e-Sehat" and "Hamdard Naunehal"
High Court allowed the suit in favour of respondent and restrained petitioner from using the name
Petitioner's name could give an abrupt impression that it was some publication of Hamdard National Foundation i.e. respondent
Such name was deceptive and so was rightly declared by High Court as name of petitioner's daily newspaper could create deception
Supreme Court declined to interfere in the judgment passed by High Court
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.
Roznama Hamdard c/o Maymar Times seeks leave to appeal from the judgment dated 30-7-2008 of Islamabad High Court, whereby, the appeal filed by Hamdard National Foundation Pakistan (respondent) was accepted and their suit was decreed to the extent that the petitioner be restrained from infringing the respondent's registered trademark "Hamdard" by using the same for their publication "Roznama Hamdard."
2. The petitioner initiated the publication of a daily newspaper under the name of Hamdard which was challenged by Hamdard National Foundation Pakistan, Hamdard Centre, Nazimabad-II Karachi, on the ground, that it was a clear violation of their registered trademark Hamdard. That they were publishing two journals by the name of Hamdard Naunehal and Hamdard-e-Sehat. That the name of the petitioner's daily newspaper as Hamdard is a clear violation of respondent trademark which is tantamount to deception. The learned High Court accepted the view and restrained the petitioner from naming their daily newspaper as Hamdard.
3. We have considered the allegations and counter-allegations of the parties in the light of the discussion adhered to by the learned High Court. It brings us to an emphatic conclusion that the petitioner's name gives an abrupt impression that it is some publication of Hamdard National Foundation. It certainly is deceptive and so was rightly declared by the learned High Court. The authorities relied upon would not help the petitioner because it is a question of fact which varies from case to case. In the instant case we have no doubt in our mind that the name of petitioner daily newspaper creates deception.
4. There being no merit in the petition, it is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal refused. M.H./R-9/SC Petition dismissed.