Skip to content

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Law relating to Trade Marks

A court convicts Meena under section 103 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 for falsely applying a registered mark to goods, and she fails to prove absence of intent to defraud. Which statement correctly describes the punishment in the absence of adequate and special reasons recorded by the court?

Imprisonment is not less than six months and may extend to three years, with fine not less than fifty thousand rupees and up to two lakh rupees. The court may go below these minimums only for adequate and special reasons recorded in the judgment.

  1. AImprisonment of at least one year and fine of at least one lakh rupees
  2. BImprisonment of at least six months, up to three years, and fine of at least fifty thousand rupees, up to two lakh rupeesCorrect
  3. CImprisonment up to six months only, or fine up to fifty thousand rupees
  4. DFine alone of up to two lakh rupees, with no imprisonment

Explanation

Section 103 prescribes imprisonment of not less than six months extending to three years, and fine of not less than fifty thousand rupees extending to two lakh rupees. Only for adequate and special reasons recorded in the judgment may the court go below these minimums. The third option confuses the minimums with maximums.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Trade Marks shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to Trade MarksFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Trade Marks questions