LPA 136/2023 & LPA 137/2023

Page 1 of 121

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Order reserved on: 21 August 2023

Order pronounced on: 06 September 2023

+

LPA 136/2023 and CM APPL. 8810/2023(Stay) and CM

APPL. 8811/2023(Summoning of Complete Record) and CM

APPL.

8813/2023(Addl.

Document)

and

CM

APPL.

14104/2023 (Addl. Document)

PROMOSHIRT SM SA

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr. Adv.

with Ms. Swathi Sukumar, Mr.

Essenese Obhan, Mr. Ritik

Raghuvansh, Mr. Pratyush Rao,

Mr. Naveen Nagarjuna, Ms.

Ayesha, Ms. Amira Dhawan

Advs.

versus

ARMASSUISSE AND ANOTHER

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr.

Shrawan Chopra, Ms. Madhu

Rewaria, Ms. Shree Mishra,

Mr. Achyut Tewari and Ms. S.

Singh, Advs. for R-1.

+

LPA 137/2023 and CM APPL. 8825/2023(Stay)

PROMOSHIRT SM SA.

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr. Adv.

with Ms. Swathi Sukumar, Mr.

Essenese Obhan, Mr. Ritik

Raghuvansh, Mr. Pratyush Rao,

Mr. Naveen Nagarjuna, Ms.

Ayesha, Ms. Amira Dhawan

Advs.

Digitally Signed

By:NEHA

Signing Date:06.09.2023

16:50:56

Signature Not Verified

LPA 136/2023 & LPA 137/2023

Page 2 of 121

versus

ARMASUISSE AND ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr.

Shrawan Chopra, Ms. Madhu

Rewaria, Ms. Shree Mishra,

Mr. Achyut Tewari and Ms. S.

Singh, Advs. for R-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

O R D E R

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

1.

The present Letters Patent Appeals¹ have been preferred

assailing the judgment dated 04 January 2023 handed down by the

learned Single Judge. The aforesaid decision has undisputedly been

rendered on appeals which had been preferred against the order dated

25 July 2022 of the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks, in terms of

which the notice of opposition filed by Armasuisse came to be

rejected and the applications for registration of trademarks as made by

Promoshirt SM SA, were directed to be accepted and processed

further for registration under the provisions of the Trade Marks Act,

1999². The jurisdiction of the learned Single Judge was invoked in

terms of Section 91 of the 1999 TM Act, which contemplates an

1 LPAs

2 1999 TM Act

Digitally Signed

By:NEHA

Signing Date:06.09.2023

16:50:56

Signature Not Verified

LPA 136/2023 & LPA 137/2023

Page 3 of 121

appeal being preferred to the High Court against an order or decision

of the Registrar made under the 1999 TM Act.

2.

The respondents have taken a preliminary objection to the

maintainability of the instant LPAs asserting that the same would not

be maintainable in light of Section 100-A of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908³. Section 100-A which was originally introduced in

1976 and as it stands presently is extracted hereinbelow in tabular

form: -

Code of Civil Procedure

(Amendment) Act 104 of

1976

Code

of

Civil

Procedure

(Amendment)

Act,

1999 (46 of 1999)

Code of Civil Procedure

(Amendment) Act, 2002

(22 of 2002)

[100A. No further appeal

in

certain

cases.-

Notwithstanding anything

contained in any Letters

Patent for any High Court

or in any other instrument

having the force of law or

in any other law for the

time being in force, where

any

appeal

from

an

appellate decree or order

is heard and decided by a

single Judge of a High

Court, no further appeal

shall

lie

from

the

judgment,

decision

or

order of such Single Judge

in such appeal or from any

decree passed in such

appeal.]

10.

Substitution

of

new

section

for

Section

100-A.—For

Section 100-A of the

principal

Act,

the

following section shall

be

substituted,

namely:—

“100-A.

No

further

appeal

in

certain

cases.—

Notwithstanding

anything contained in

any Letters Patent for

any High Court or in

any other instrument

having the force of law

or in any other law for

the

time

being

in

force,—

(a) where any appeal

from an original or

appellate

decree

or