Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The conduct anterior to the levy may give rise to suspicion but it cannot, by itself, discharge the burden of proving that the goods actually removed after 1st March 2003 bore a brand name. Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof.
The name “Karan Johar” is solely associated with Respondent 1, Karan Johar and forms a germane part of his personality and brand name and thus, has the economic right to commercially exploit the same as per his discretion.
“Merely because the Central Board of Film Certification (‘CBFC’) certificate is obtained for the film, the same does not restrict the applicant’s right to take action against the film for violation of his rights.”