$~ (Original)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on 14^th December 2022 Pronounced on 4^th January 2023 + C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 158/2022, I.A. 20094/2022, I.A.

20095/2022 and I.A. 20096/2022 ARMASUISSE ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Shrawan Chopra, Ms. Madhu Rewari, Mr. Vibhav Mittal, Ms. Shree Mishra, Mr.

Achyut Tewari, Advs.

versus THE TRADE MARK REGISTRY & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Mr. S.K.Bansal, Mr. Rishi Bansal, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Anmol Kakkar, Mr. Aditya Rajesh, Ms. Aishwarya, Ms.Asavari, Ms. Sanya and Ms.

Tejaswini Chandrashekar, Advs. for R-2 + C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 159/2022, I.A. 20153/2022, I.A.

20154/2022 and I.A. 20155/2022 ARMASUISSE ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Shrawan Chopra, Ms. Madhu Rewari, Mr. Vibhav Mittal, Ms. Shree Mishra, Mr.

Achyut Tewari, Advs.

Versus THE TRADE MARKS REGISTRY & ANR..... Respondents Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Mr. S.K.Bansal, Mr. Rishi Bansal, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Anmol Kakkar, Mr. Aditya Rajesh, Ms. Aishwarya, Ms.Asavari, Ms. Sanya and Ms.

Signature Not Verified C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 158/2022 & cont. matter Page 1 of 79 Digitally Signed Tejaswini Chandrashekar, Advs. for R-2 CORAM:

HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR % J U D G M E N T

04.01.2023 C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 158/2022, I.A. 20094/2022, I.A. 20095/2022 and I.A. 20096/2022 C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 159/2022, I.A. 20153/2022, I.A. 20154/2022 and I.A. 20155/2022

1. These appeals involve cognate issues. Submissions advanced at the bar by both sides are also overlapping. As such, they have been taken up and disposed of together.

2. The appellant is a Federal Agency of the Swiss Federation, and procures armaments for Switzerland‘s Federal Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport. The appellant, therefore, represents, essentially, the military wing of the Swiss Government.

3. Respondent 2, in these appeals, Promoshirt SM S.A. (―Promoshirt‖, hereinafter) applied to the Registrar of Trademarks, New Delhi for registration of the trademarks (i) ―SWISS MILITARY‖ in Class 25 in respect of clothing, readymade garments, footwear, headgear, coats, overcoats, jackets, jerseys, undergarments, socks‖ and (ii) the mark in Class 25 in respect of ―textile industries‖. Both applications were on ―proposed to be used‖ basis. The appellant opposed the applications. The opposition of the appellant was rejected, and the trademarks were permitted registration by the learned Deputy Registrar of Trademarks vide separate orders Signature Not Verified C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 158/2022 & cont. matter Page 2 of 79 Digitally Signed dated 25^th July 2022. The appellant has, by means of these appeals, assailed the said orders and, therefore, contested the right of the aforesaid trademarks ―SWISS MILITARY‖ and to registration under the Trademarks Act, 1999 (―the Trademarks Act‖).

4. I may note, here, the appellant‘s precise grievance. Mr. Pravin Anand, appearing for the appellant, submits that the appellant has no objection to Respondent 2 using the logo per se, as a white cross on a black background, for its products. His client, however, seriously objects to Respondent 2 being permitted to register or use either (i) a white cross on a red background, i.e. or (ii) the appellation ―SWISS MILITARY‖. Neither mark, submits Mr Anand, can be permitted either to be registered or used, in view of various statutory proscriptions which are in place. What Respondent 2 actually uses, he seeks to point out, is , i.e. a white cross on a red background with the ―SWISS MILITARY‖ appellation below it.

5. Inasmuch as the impugned order dated 25^th July 2022, read with Section 10(2), [10. Limitation as to colour. –] of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, allows Respondent 2 to do so, the appellant calls the said order into question in these appeals.

6. Mr. Akhil Sibal, at the very outset of his submissions, submitted that his client was willing to restrict the registration of the im