THE COURT: Argument on behalf of the plaintiff is resumed and
concluded. In course of argument, the plaintiff has cited the following
judgments:-
1) (1972) 1 SCC 618 ( Parle Products (P) Ltd. Vs. J.P. And Co., Mysore)
2) (2002) 3 SCC 65 (Laxmikant V. Patel Vs. Chetanbhai Shah And
Another)
3) AIR 1960 SC 142 (Corn Products Refining Co. Vs. Shangrila Food
Products Ltd.)
By relying upon the judgment in Parle Products (supra) it is submitted
that the test of similarity between two mark is the idea or concept behind the
registered mark or the prior user and the latter one. It is also submitted that
the subsequent entrant to the market with similar class of product should stay
away from the earlier mark to avoid the allegation of having copied the earlier
mark.
