S.J.VAZIFDAR, K.R.SHRIRAM
CIPLA Limited – Appellant
Versus
Registrar of Trade Marks – Respondent
K.R. Shriram, J.
1. Rule. By consent of parties, rule made returnable forthwith.
2. The petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the order of respondent no.1 removing from the register the petitioner's trade mark CIPLA and a writ of mandamus directing him to restore to the register the petitioner's said trade mark.
3. The mark was registered with effect from 6.11.1945 as evidenced by a certificate of registration dated 10.02.1949. The registration was renewed from time to time and was last renewed for a period of 7 years on 6.11.1995 till 6.11.2002. Thereafter due to inadvertence the registration was not renewed.
4. Sometime in the first quarter of 2012, the petitioner came to know that its mark had been removed from the register due to non-renewal. The petitioner however, had not received any notice as per Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) from respondent no.1 notifying it of the date of expiration and the conditions as to payment of fees and otherwise upon which a renewal of registration may be obtained. The petitioner therefore, caused an RTI application to be submitted on 24.04.2012 seeking informati
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.