The High Court having appellate jurisdiction over the Registry is the Court which has jurisdiction for rectification proceedings under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958.

JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) O. P. No. 2/63 was filed by Habeeb Ahmed, under Sections 46, 47, 56 read with 107 and 108 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 195s for rectification, cancellation etc. , of the trade name "rafiq Jadi Beedi", he having taken the trade name of "rafiq Judi Bidi".

( 2 ) IT may be stated that "rafiq Jadi Beedi" was got registered by the 2nd respondent as Trade Mark No. 203382 in the Office of the Trade Mark Registry at Madras. The petitioner was manufacturing beedies in the name of "rafiq Jadi Bidi" and filed an application for registration of this Trade Mark on 12-6-1963. But the registration was opposed by the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent further filed a criminal case No. 5127 of 1963 on the file of the 8th City Magistrate, Hyderabad against the petitioner under Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter called "the Act") read with Sections 482, 486 and 488 of the Indian Penal Code, for infringement of the trade mark. In these proceedings, the petitioner pleaded invalidity of the registration and also filed this O. P. on 27-7-1963. He further applied for slay of the criminal case by way of an application No. 229/63, which was granted. Subsequently the 2nd respondent filed applications 332 and 333/63 to dismiss the O. P. on the ground that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain tins petition.

( 3 ) THE question of jurisdiction is not only raised in this O. P. but also in another O. P. which is connected with it, viz, O. P. No. 3/63.

( 4 ) NOTICE was given to the learned Advocate-General to assist the Court.

( 5 ) I have heard the arguments of the learned Advocate-General, Mr. Jali Aluned for the Petitioner and Mr. G. Venkatrama Sastri, for the 2nd respondent. It appears to me clear that this Court has no jurisdiction under the Scheme of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, the Central Government is authorised to create Trade Marks Registries for such places as they deem fit, and accordingly, under S. O. Nos. 2601 dated 25-11-1959 as amended by S. O. 1626 dated 28-6-1960, which were made under Section 5 of the Act, four places of Trade Mark Registries were specified, (1) at Bombay, the territorial limits of which comprise the State of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh; (2) at Calcutta, comprising the States of Assam, Bihar. Orissa and West Bengal and the Union Territories of Andaman and Nicobar, Manipur and Tripura; (3) at Delhi, comprising Status of Jammu and Kashmir. Punjab, Rajasthan and U. P. and the Union Territories of Delhi and Himachal Pradesh; and (4) at Madras, comprising the territorial limits of the States of Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Madras, Mysore, and the Union Territories of Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands. In order to determine, which High Court has jurisdiction for any of these States, it is necessary to refer to Sections 2 (1) (h), 3 and 5. They are as follows:"section 2 (1) (h ). "high Courts" means the High Court having jurisdiction under Section 3;"section 3: --"the High Court having jurisdiction under this Act shall be the High Court within the limits of whose appellate jurisdiction the office of the Trade Marks Registry referred to in each of the following cases is situate, namely: -- (a) in relation to a trade mark on the Register of Trade Marks at the commencement of this Act, the office of the Trade Marks Registry within whose territorial limits the principal place of business in India of the proprietor of the trade mark as entered in the register at such commencement is situate; (b) in relation to a trade mark for which an application for registration is pending at or is made on or after the commencement of this Act, the office of the Trade Marks Registry within whose territorial limits the principal plane of business in India of the applicant as disclosed in his application is situate; (c) in relation to a trade mark registered in the names of joint proprietors before, the commencement of this Act, the office o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document