The court emphasized the need for expeditious and meaningful disposal of proceedings, especially in matters relating to intellectual property rights.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petitions relate to Appellant's mark `sdHP' [IMG] which has been rectified/cancelled by the Respondent No. 1 Registrar of Trade Marks vide impugned order dated 15th December, 2022. The said impugned order was stayed by this Court vide order dated 25th January, 2023. The said order reads as follows:

"11. Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Senior Counsel for Appellant, submits that the impugned order is ex- facie arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Act. He emphasises that in the infringement suit filed by Respondent No. 2 in respect of Appellant's mark before the District Court, injunction was refused. Respondent No. 2 then filed form TM-0 seeking rectification/ cancellation of Appellant's mark, which is presently pending. Mr. Rao argues that during the pendency of rectification proceedings, there was no basis for the Deputy Registrar to invoke suo moto powers under Section 57(4) of the Act to cancel Appellant's mark. The Deputy Registrar did not provide Appellant adequate time to respond, and in haste, now removed Appellant's mark, which was on the register for almost two and a half years. That apart, even the complaint, basis whereof the impugned order has been passed, is not in conformity with prescribed format.

12. Issue notice. Mr. Geetesh Meena, counsel accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No. 2. He states that Deputy Registrar has decided Respondent No. 2's rectification petition itself by way of the impugned order. He is however unable to support this contention from the documents on record. Mr. Meena states that he received the paper-book only day before yesterday and would need time to examine the record and clarify this issue. Let reply be filed within four weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

13. Issue notice to Respondent No. 1, upon filing of process fee, by all permissible modes, returnable on the next date of hearing. Respondent No.1 shall file reply, if any, within four weeks from the date of service. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

14. For the reasons noted above, it is directed that till the next date of hearing, the impugned order dated 15th December, 2022, shall remain stayed and Appellant's mark under application No. 3986970 is restored on the register".

3. The Writ Petition bearing no. W.P.(C)-IPD 10/2023 has been filed by Landmark Crafts Private Limited, seeking early disposal of rectification/cancellation which has been filed under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 before the Respondent No. 1-Registrar of Trademarks.

4. After hearing some submissions, it emerges that the following four proceedings are pending between the different parties:

i) C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 1/2023 titled Romil Gupta Trading as Sohan Lal Gupta v. Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

ii) W.P.(C)-IPD 10/2023 titled Landmark Crafts Private Limited v. Union of India Through Its Secretary & Anr.

iii) CS (COMM) 117/2019 titled M/s Landmark Crafts Private Limited v. M/s Sohan Lal Gupta through its Proprietor Sh. Romil Gupta before the ld. ADJ (Commercial Court) Karkardooma Court.

iv) Rectification Application 266607 titled Romil Gupta Trading as M/s Sohan Lal Gupta v. Landmark Crafts Private Limited before the Registrar of Trade Marks.

5. A coordinate bench of this Court in Jumeirah Beach Resort LLC v. Designarch Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (C.O (COMM-IPD-TM) 124/2022, order dated 28th November 2022) considering the issue of consolidation of proceedings under the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and IP Division Rules, 2022 observed as follows:

"10. Section 125(2) empowers the Registrar of Trademarks, at any stage, to refer the matter to the IPAB. The jurisdiction, authority and powers of the IPAB having been transferred to this Court consequent on the enactment of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, the power of reference contained in Section 125(2) of the Trademarks A