Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Radico Khaitan Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Registrar of Trade Marks – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present appeal was filed before the IPAB and has been received by this Court, pursuant to the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021.
3. This is an appeal filed by the Appellant- Radico Khaitan Ltd. challenging the rejection of trademark application No.2387452 for the registration of the word mark "EFKAY'S XXX RUM" in class 33. The Appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 23rd June, 2020 passed by the Senior Examiner by which the review petition filed by the Appellant has been dismissed. The said review petition was filed seeking review of the order dated 19th July, 2018 vide which the trade mark application of the Appellant bearing no. 2387452 for the registration of the mark "EFKAY'S XXX RUM" in class 33 was rejected.
4. The background of the case is that, the Appellant filed an application for the registration of the mark "EFKAY'S XXX RUM" on 20th August, 2012. An examination report dated 23rd May, 2013 was issued by the Trade Mark Registry. The report raised objections on relative grounds of refusal under Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter, `Act'). In response to the
The court ruled that ownership established through an assignment deed prevails over objections to trademark registration based on similarity to existing marks.
The court held that existing trade mark registrations must be properly considered in evaluating new applications, impacting grounds for refusal based on laudatory nature and absence of evidence.
The registration of a mark cannot be denied solely on the grounds of descriptiveness if distinctive character is substantiated through existing registrations.
The court ruled that a trademark can be advertised with conditions of limited exclusivity focusing on the composite mark, safeguarding against claim to the individual parts.
The court considered the ownership of cited marks and the absence of third-party marks in the examination report as key factors in allowing the appellant's trade mark application.
Trademark registrations cannot be denied based on similarity when prior registrations exist, and the use of national symbols must be considered permissible if no objection is provided by relevant aut....
A trade mark recognized as well-known under the Trade Marks Act is protected against concurrent use by others regardless of the class of goods, particularly when evidence of rightful prior use and bo....
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
