A word is an invented word within the meaning of Section 9(1)(c) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, if it is newly-coined and conveys no sense or meaning, or at any rate, no obvious meaning, to ordinary Englishmen.

JUDGMENT :- In this appeal under S. 109 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, M/s. Nestle' s Products (India) Limited object to the grant of registration to the trade mark "INSTEA"in favour of M/s. Alvitone Laboratories. Alvitone applied for registration of this trade mark under item No. 3 of the Fourth Schedule to the Trade Mark Rules 1959 which, inter alia, included "tea". The application was made on the footing that the trade mark was "proposed to be used"by Alvitone. The Assistant Registrar accepted Alvitone' s application and granted registration to "INSTEA"(word per se) under Part A of the Register.

2. Nestles filed an opposition before the Assistant Registrar objecting to the grant of registration to Alvitone' s trade mark. Nestles contended that "INSTEA"was not an invented word. According to them, it was easily recognizable as a portmanteau word to denote "instant tea", an expression descriptive of the character of the commodity in ordinary trade parlance. To grant registration for that word-mark in Alvitone' s favour would, according to Nestles, tend to give monopoly advantages to Alvitone and rob others in the same line of trade of their right to employ the very same descriptive expression to denote their products. In support of their contentions. Nestles filed a number of affidavits from third parties who stated that Alvitone' s trade mark immediately conveyed to them the suggestion that it related to instant tea.

3. The Assistant Registrar rejected all the grounds of objection put forward by Nestles. He held that "INSTEA"was eminently qualified for registration in Part-A of the Register under S. 9 (1) (c) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. He was of the view that it was an invented word. He relied on parallel cases in the books in which registration was granted to trade marks involving words similarly couched. He refuted the contention put forward by Nestles that the word INSTEA would not (sic) tend to embarrass either the trade in tea or the public which consumed it. He rejected the affidavits obtained by Nestles from third parties. He remarked that they were all in stereotyped form and came from the English educated elite who formed only a minority of tea drinkers. According to the Assistant Registrar, the mass of the people who consumed tea in the country were uneducated and they would not gain the impression that INSTEA stood for instant tea - an impression which could only be formed by an intelligent process of subjecting the word to fragmentation.

4. Mr. Kurian appearing for Nestle' s in this appeal submitted that the Assistant Registrar' s reasonings and findings were untenable. He said that the Assistant Registrar had not properly instructed himself in the law before proceeding to decide the question of registration in this case.

5. In the first place, Mr. Kurian submitted that "INSTEA"is a combination of two concepts, "instant"and "tea". The expression was not an invented word in the true sense. It was quite a commonplace portmanteau word, obtained by clipping the latter part of the expression "instant"and joining what was left of it to the other expression "tea". Learned counsel pointed out that "INSTEA"must suggest to everyone the idea of "instant tea". He explained that the word "instant", when used as an adjective, referred to anything which is made immediately soluble in water such, for instance, instant coffee, instant tea etc. According to him, instant tea which is the idea conveyed by the expression INSTEA, was a common trade description familiar to traders and consumers. The impression which this word created in the people' s minds might tend to confuse them if the trade mark were used indiscriminately for all types of tea, such as green tea, blended tea, tea dust and instant tea. On the other hand, it may also deceive them if it was used for non-instant tea of every kind.

6. These submissions of Mr. Kurian were, however, vigorously countered by Mr. M. A. Rajagopalan, appear