JUDGMENT Abaid Ullah, Khan, J.-This appeal arises out of the decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks, respondent 2, dated the 2nd August, 1983, rejecting the appellants[1] opposition to the registration of respondent l's mark compriring of word ottage with a device of lady in a sitting posture with curtain in this background and a rainbow at the centre of the label for hair removing powder. The appellant got his mark with the word Cocage with almost similar figure of the lady and design of curtain and rainabow for its hair removing powder registered as far back as in 1960.
Respondent t applied for the registration of mark in 1981 The appellant opposed the registration of respondent l's mark as it was likely to deceive or cause confusion as envisaged by sections 8 (a) and 10(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1940. However, the Registrar of Trade Marks ordered the registration of respondent l's mark with minor modifications and directed that the goods under that mark would not be marketed in Fatsalabad district where the appellant was carrying on business.
2. That two marks are so simliar even to the naked eye that any customer is most likely to be deceived by taking the one for the other. The words .Cottage' on the maik in dispute is written in such a manner as it bears close resemblance to the word 'College' appearing on the appilant's mark. Bven with the small modifications respondent 1's mark likely to cause confusion in the minds of the customers in distinguishing it from that of the appellant and they are apt to be deceived. In the circumstances it was a fit case in which the registration of respondent i's mark, in view of the oppesition of the appellant, ought to have been disallowed.
Course of pendency of its application before the Registrar that respondent 1 shifted its place of business to Bahawalpur. It is almost impossible for the appellant to oversee the activities of respondent 1 whether or not it would refrain from marketing its goods in Faisalabad district Consequently the appeal is accepted, the impugned order of the Registrar is set aside and the registration of respondent l's mark with modifications is disallowed. The appellant will get costs of this appeal from respondent 1. The cross objections filed by respondent 1 are Without any fores and are dismissed.