1. This appeal is a continuation of a rather chequered and on the whole unfortunate litigation. As far back as 21-8-1942, the respondent made an application to the Registrar of Trade Marks for registration of his trade mark "HAUTIN" which he wanted to use in connection with the sole of bidis. On 31-12-1948, the Registrar directed the registration of the trade mark, but limited it to Trichinopnly and Tanjore districts.

The respondent instead of being content with that decision, committed the folly of appealing against that decision, and the appeal came before Snail, J. and that learned Judge on 4-9-1950, remand-ed the matter back to the Registrar and asked him to consider whether he should not register the respondents trade mark without limitation.

Against that decision the appellant, who has opposed the registration, came in appeal to this Court and the main ground of appeal was that Shah, J, had refused to deal with his cross-objections as in the opinion of the learned Judge the cross-objections were barred. This Court delivering its judgment on 13-9-1951 took the view that Shah, J. was in error in coming to the conclusion that the cross-objections of the appellant were not