JUDGMENT

This appeal rises an interesting question as to whether an application under Section 131 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (the TM Act) may be filed for extension of the time limit of two months specified in Rule 45(1) of the Trade Mark Rules, 2017 (the TM Rules). Questions ancillary thereto, such as the implications of the deemed abandonment of an opposition under Rule 45(2) of the TM Rules also arise for consideration.

The factual matrix

2. On 09.05.2016, the first respondent filed an application for registration of a label mark consisting of a pictorial representation of 'KANGARO' as an essential feature. On the ground that the appellant had adopted the mark 'KANGARO' in 1959, the appellant filed notice of opposition on 06.01.2017 after noticing the advertisement relating to the first respondent's mark in Trade Mark Journal No.1767. In response to the notice of opposition, the first respondent filed the counter statement on 19.05.2017 and such counter statement was received by the appellant on 05.08.2017. On 23.09.2017, the appellant filed a request in Form TM-M seeking an extension of one month for filing evidence in support of the opposition. Evidence in support of the oppo