Question Description
Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Read the information given below and answer the questions based on it.The Trademark Act of 1999, both in letter and spirit, lays down that, while it encourages fair trade in every way and aims to foster and not to hamper competition, it also provides that no one, especially a trader, is justified in damaging or jeopardizing another’s business by fraud, deceit, trickery or unfair methods of any sort. This necessary precludes the trading by one dealer upon the good name and reputation built up by another. Passing off as an action arose as a part of tort and was very widely acknowledged in the common law countries. Passing off claims can be challenging and expensive to fight. It may be necessary to arrange market research surveys in order to demonstrate whether the claimant has a reputation in specific features of goods or services.The recognition of an infringement in various forms has garnered the required attention but passing off has yet not been able to establish a stage in the eyes of the common man and therefore it can still be seen taking place, unreported. The issues there under such as how clarity can be brought by characteristic difference between infringement and passing off has been brought to the public domain by the courts in India in a number of cases. The major hypothesis of the project is that the laws have not been able to demarcate a specific line between infringement and passing off beyond registration. Thereby leading to chaos in the common man’s mind with respect to the said. It is beneficial if combined action for infringement and passing off is brought in one suit as incorporating a plea of infringement, if the mark gets registered can always amend the plaint.Q.Which one of the following is the view point of the author related to second para of the article?a)It protects the owner from any kind of imposter or imitation, expressed or implied which in the world of marketing could be considered to be repositories of reputation and goodwill propelling from the business or trade in the said sector where the trademark holds.b)The basis of passing off action being a false representation by the defendant, it must be proved in each case as a fact that the misrepresentation was made. The use by the defendant in connection of the goods, of the mark, name, or get-up in question must represent such goods to be the goods of the plaintiff, or the goods of the plaintiff of a particular class or quality; and the defendant’s use of such mark, name or get-up is calculated to deceive.c)The plaintiff must demonstrate that he suffered or in a quia timet action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief endangered by the defendant’s misrepresentation that the source of the defendant’s goods or service is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff.d)False representation made by the defendant, whether expressly or otherwise, must be proved as a matter of fact in each case. Absence of actual deception is not determinative. The ultimate question of whether the deception is likely to cause confusion remains a question of fact for the courts to decide in the light of available evidence.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.