Trade Marks Act, 1999

Section 28 — Identical product of the defendants shows a striking similarity — Trademark "CIALIS" of the plaintiff pronounced as "SI-ALIS" and the defendant's trademark is pronounced as "SC-ALIS" — Pronunciation of the two found to be identical or nearly identical, likely to cause confusion — Photocopies can be considered in the absence of any plea of the same not being true photocopies — Defendants, so as to defeat the interim order, while changing the name of their product from SCALIS to SCIFIL retained the same shape of the tablet — Defendants instead of appearing before court, attempted to overreach and reap benefits and pass off their goods as that of the plaintiffs, by making a marginal difference only in the trade name — Damages awarded to the plaintiffs in the sum of Rs. 10 lacs against the defendants jointly and severally.