Back
C. HARI SHANKAR
Ravi Manchanda Trading As Seema Engineering Works – Appellant
Versus
Registrar of Trade Marks – Respondent
ORDER (Oral)
C. Hari Shankar, J.
1. This Court never ceases to be surprised at the kind of the orders which come before it, from the office of the Registry of Trade Marks/Controller General of Patents.
2. The present case is, in fact, sui generis. The order, dated 12 July 2018 - if one may call it that - under challenge reads thus:
"A Hearing in respect of the above matter came up before me on 12/07/2018 and the following is to be communicated to the applicant/agent:
1. Shri adv. Rajesh Sharma applicant/Advocate/Agent appeared before me and made his submissions. I have heard arguments, gone through the records and passed the following Order.
Attention is invited under Rule 36(1) of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 where the application is refused a request may be made in form no TM-M along with the prescribed fee to communicate in writing the grounds of decision and materials used by the Registrar in arriving at his decision to refuse the said application. The said request on form TM-M should be tendered within 30 days of receipt of the order of refusal.
Dated: 12 July 2018
(HEMANT KHOSLA)
SENIOR EXAMINER OF TRADE MARKS
(Authorized under 3(2) of the Act)"
3. The part of the above communica
The central legal point established in the judgment is the option given to the opponent to adduce evidence or communicate in writing the intention to rely on the facts stated in the notice of opposit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the time limit for filing the counter statement in trade mark applications, emphasizing the requirement of actual receipt of ....
The voluntary nature of abandonment, the strict construction of Section 21(2) of the Trade Marks Act, and the importance of valid service of opposition notices.
The discretion of the authority in treating an application as abandoned under Rule 56(3) of the 2002 Rules is justified, and the absence of a provision enabling the setting aside of an ex parte order....
A trademark application may be reconsidered if the applicant can demonstrate that prior decisions were not communicated, allowing for appeals beyond the standard time limit under specific circumstanc....
Timeliness in responding to trademark examination reports is crucial, and delays not condoned; rights in the mark persist despite abandonment.
The court emphasized the importance of the Registrar's decision on the petitioner's request for abandonment being made within a specified time frame and in accordance with principles of natural justi....
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
