Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA

Constituent of Symbiosis International (Deemed University)

(Established Under Section 3 of the UGC Act, 1956 Vide Notification No. F.9 – 12/2001- U.3 of the Government of India)
Re Accredited By NAAC (UGC) with ‘A’ Grade |Approved by Bar Council of India
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Internal Continuous Evaluation (Backlog) (April 2020)
Term End Examination (Backlog) (April 2020)
Course: Intellectual Property Law
Semester: VII (BA./BBA.LL.B.)
(Batch: 2016-21/2015-20/2014-19/2013-24)

Day and Date: Monday, May 25, 2020 Time: 11:00 am -01:00 pm
(To be filled by the Candidate)
Name of the Invigilator
NAME
Signature of PRN NO.
the Invigilator 40 DIVISION
BATCH
Instructions:
1. Type the answers in a word file. Word count permitted for each question’s response is maximum 1500
words.
2. Mention your name, PRN, Division and Batch in the word file.
3. You are evaluated on understanding rather than recall and memorization.
4. You can refer to anything in hard copy.
5. Submit completed Assignment between 01:01pm – 01:05pm via email to kanan@symlaw.edu.in and cc to
examination@symlaw.edu.in
6. Assessment includes Online Assignment followed by Viva Voce of each candidate.
7. Performance in both Assignment and Viva Voce will produce the final result of the Internal Continuous
Evaluation (Backlog) or Term End Examination (Backlog) or both, as applicable in a given case.
Candidates missing either one or both the components will be marked as ‘Absent’.

.
Question 1. The author has a right to preserve, protect and nurture his creations through his moral rights. A creative
individual is uniquely invested with the power and mystique of original genius, creating a privileged relationship
between a creative author and his work.” In the light of the landmark judgment of Amarnath Sehgal v. Union of
India 2005 (30) PTC 253 (DEL) explain in detail author’s moral right and special rights of author under Copyright
Act, 1957. Further explain various rights and difference between author and owner under the Copyright Act, 1957.
(20 Marks)

Question 2. The Plaintiff H&M Hennes & Mauritz Retail Pvt.Ltd had sought an injunction in the Delhi High Court
restraining Hm Megabrands Pvt. Ltd for passing off/infringement of trademark/of the plaintiffs, by the use of the
trade mark and for ancillary reliefs. In the above case plaintiff is the proprietor of the well-known trademark H&M.
The defendants are using the brand HM viz. hmmegabrands and having the website hmmegabrands.com. The
plaintiff seek to have an injunction and restrain the defendants for using the brand HM. With the help of the above
judgment, explain in detail the importance of ‘use of the mark’ and difference between Passing-off and an
infringement under The Trade Marks Act. Further explain whether in the above case plaintiff is entitled for the
relief by the Delhi High Court taking into consideration the provisions of the Trade Mark law. . (20 Marks)