Back
AMIT BANSAL
Burger King Company LLC – Appellant
Versus
Virendra Kumar Gupta – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMIT BANSAL, J.
I.A. 10228/2022(for stay)
1. The present rectification petition has been filed seeking cancellation/removal of the impugned mark 
registered under no. 2052257 in class 43 in the name of the respondent no. 1, from the Register of Trade Marks.
2. Earlier, the petitioner had filed a writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 2695/2018 (later renumbered as W.P.(C)-IPD 53/2021) seeking cancellation of the aforesaid trademark. Vide order dated 20th March, 2018, while issuing notice in the said writ petition, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had granted stay on the operation of the aforesaid mark and the marks bearing registration nos. 2052258 and 2052259.
3. Vide order dated 26th May, 2022, the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn by a Coordinate Bench of this Court while giving liberty to the petitioner to file a rectification petition. The stay granted on the operation of the impugned mark was extended for a period of six weeks.
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid liberty, the present rectification petition was filed by the petitioner. Vide order dated 12th July, 2022, notice was issued and the respondent no. 1 undertook the following:
The central legal point established in the judgment is the potential for the impugned mark to deceive the public and create confusion in the market, leading to the court's decision to stay its operat....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the recognition of the mark 'BURGER KING' as a well-known mark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and the distinctiveness of trade marks.
The jurisdiction to exercise rectification of a mark is subject to the finding of the Civil Court as regards the prima facie tenability of the plea of invalidity, as a statutory safeguard to prevent ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to determine the prima facie tenability of the plea of invalidity of a registered trademark and the significance of 'bona fide use'....
The registration of a trade mark that is identical or similar to an existing mark is liable to be cancelled if it is likely to cause confusion among consumers.
A trademark rectification petition is not maintainable if the validity is contested in a prior ongoing suit, as per the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
In a case where issue of invalidity is raised or arises independent of a suit, prescribed statutory authority will be sole authority to deal with matter.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application and interpretation of various provisions of the Trademarks Act, 1999 in determining the similarity of trademarks, dishonest adop....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
