G.ROHINI, RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Intellectual Property Attorneys Association – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.
1. The petition impugns Clause No.3 of the Office Order No.16 of 2012-2013 dated 8th June, 2012 issued by the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Controller General), Government of India and which Clause No.3 is as under:
“3. No request for amendment shall be allowed which seeks substantial alteration in the application for registration of trademark. The substantial amendment in the trademark, proprietor details, specification of goods/services (except deletion of some of the existing items), statement as to the use of mark shall not be permitted. However request for amendment in the proprietorship of the trademark on the basis of valid assignment or transmission; amendment in address of the applicant or in the applicant’s address for service; deletion or confinement of any item in the specification of goods/services, confinement/limitation in the area of sale of goods/rendering of service may be allowed.”
2. Notice of the petition was issued on 29th May, 2014. It was inter alia the plea of the petitioner that the petitioner, prior to the institution of this petition, had also made a representation dated 11th February, 2013 aga
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.