Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... sought to be booted out of the register. we also note the studied silence of the applicant on the protection afforded by statute by virtue of section 32 of the act. in the instant case the applicant are lacking in commercial scruples and are attempting to crush a relatively small time indian player from playing its rightful ..... rules mandates that every appeal shall be filed along with evidence in the form of affidavit. affidavits are not included in the definition of evidence in section 3 of the evidence act and can be used as evidence only for sufficient reasons recorded by the board. the respondent have filed an affidavit in their counter statement. board may ..... back in 1996 and hold 49% of the paid up capital therein. accordingly, the applicant is estoped from contending that the mark champion is hit by section 9 of the said act and inherently not capable of distinguishing the product of any trade. 13. the applicant have filed a rejoinder to the written submissions made by the respondent. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the learned counsel submitted that the provisional and complete specifications of the impugned patent no. 189097 are both not in compliance with the requirements of section 10 of the patents act, 1970 and section 64(1)(h) and are liable to be revoked on this ground alone. 56.the counsel for the respondent submitted that no evidence has ..... the patent. the grant of the patent in question was therefore, invalid and was liable to revoked on the grounds mentioned in clauses (d) and (e) of section 26(1) of the act." 6. 1887 rpc 62 williams v. nye patent.- action for infringement - combination of the two old machines: want of subject matter -invention - invalidity. we ..... it is bard to conceive how there can be an inventive step without novelty 26. the expression "does not involve any inventive step" used in section 26(1) (a) of the act and its equivalent word "obvious", have acquired special significance in the terminology of patent law. the obviousness has to be strictly and objectively judged. for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... may be mentioned here that the opponents have failed to substantiate the fact that the word jaguar has attained the well-known statutes in terms of section 11 of the act in these proceedings as stated earlier. i have no hesitation in allowing the impugned application for registration which is much prior to the opponents application ..... mark and this is negation of the scheme and purpose of legislation governing trade marks law embodied in the preamble to the act. consequently, the impugned mark is barred by provisions section 9 of the act and not capable of distinguishing the goods of the respondent. the impugned mark was only proposed to be used and so ..... other reason for dismissing the opposition being that the appellant are not registered in class 14 for watches is both illogical and fallacious. this is contrary to section 21 which states any persons may file an opposition in the prescribed manner. further, the inference that the respondent is prior applicant for watches is no justification .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... and associated with the respondents. the marks are identical and therefore the registration is likely to cause confusion and deception among the public and is therefore prohibited under section 11 of the act. 25. the appellants filed another application (label mark) under no. 545855 in class 30 which was refused registration by order dated 05/07/2005 which is ..... prior registration for the same and similar specification of goods to that of the impugned application is a bar to the registration of the impugned mark under section 11 of the act. 28. the appellants are trying to obtain registration by filing number of applications and also by giving different date of users for which there is no ..... only a website which can be uploaded by any person. as regards the dictionary meaning, we are not sure when it was published. the provisions of section 11(11) of the act does not apply as it is not in good faith. 52. we have heard both the counsel at length and have considered their arguments and have .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... that there had been two letters sent to the registrar requesting for extension, for which they received no communication. the registrar has the power to grant extension as per section 131 of the act. the counsel referred to the following judgments: 1. wyeth holdings corpn. and anr. v. c.g., of p.d. and tm and ors. [2007(34) ptc 1 ..... by the learned counsel for the respondent no. 1, reads as under: 105.) extension of time.-(1) an application for extension of time under section 131 (not being a time expressly provided in the act or prescribed by rule 79 or by sub-rule (4) of rule 80 or a time for the extension of which provision is made in the ..... the parties before disposing of an application for extension of time, and no appeal shall lie from any order of the registrar under this section. the registrar has been empowered to extend time for doing certain acts provided he is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for extending the time. but there is an exception to this power. the exception .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... 2nd respondent i.e. in the registrar of trade marks, but the registrar ignored the same and issued the certificates as well ignored the representation under section 19 of the act. 14. the applicant being a party aggrieved has made these applications for rectification on the following grounds:- (a) that the applicant is the prior and ..... . in spite of the complaint, the registration certificates have been issued in march, 2010. 12. on 23.03.2010, representation under section 19 of the act was made before the registrar of trade marks. 13. against the order of injunction, the 1st respondent preferred appeal and the same was dismissed after hearing ..... or sarvasidhi fashon or any similar trade mark, which order is subsisting an on date. on 06.01.2010, the applicant filed a complaint under section 107 of the act before the registrar of trade marks against the impugned trade mark registration. on 18.02.2010, a reminder was sent to the registrar regarding the complaint .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the next issue as to whether the impugned trade mark could be allowed to remain on the register in contravention of the provisions of sections 9 and 11 of the act. section 9 of the act deals with the relative grounds for refusal of registration. a trade mark shall not be refused registration if before the date of application for ..... proves that the mark was in use. 26. the counsel for respondent further submitted that the applicants were not persons aggrieved as per the provisions of section 57 of the act. by the impugned mark sonata remaining on the register, the applicants rights are not affected in any way. he also referred to the judgments cited by ..... out that he had denied the same in his counter statement- para 23. 23. with regard to refusal of registration under section 9 and 11 of the act, the respondent submitted that section 9 of the act was arbitrary. the respondents trade mark had acquired distinctiveness by use. the respondent had applied for registration in the year 1992 whereas .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... when that case was decided. it appears to me, therefore, that mr. justice tomlin has reached what, to my mind, is the right construction of both the sections in the act of 1905, with the consequence that, accepting the facts as found by mr. justice tomlin, it has been proved to him that there was not, within the meaning ..... might, without having any goods to offer, advertise his mark at periodic intervals, and thereby prevent any attack being made upon the mark under the provisions of sec. 26(1) of the act. glossing upon the above observations of mr. faulkner in harold radford and company case, j. falconer in hermes trade mark in the high court of justice, ..... to be rectified by way of cancellation in respect of the goods specified in the registration certificate in accordance with clause (b) of sub section (1) of section 46 of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958. 6. on the contrary the learned counsel for the first respondent contended that the city civil fast track court had granted a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... and orders were reserved. 5. we have heard the counsel for petitioner/respondent shri shailen bhatia. 6. the learned counsel submitted that as per the provisions of section 92 of the act, the appellate board is vested with the powers of a civil court and has the powers to review its own decision or order under order 47 rule 1 ..... regard to the judgments relied on by the counsel under the motor vehicles act as well as under the industrial disputes act, the powers to review before the tribunal were said to be vested with the tribunal as decided in those cases. as regards the motor vehicles act - section 169 it is said that the powers were vested with the claim tribunal ..... as that of a civil court to receive documents, summoning of witness and as per the provisions of section 195 of the cpc. the observation of the division bench of the high .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the main issue for consideration would be to decide whether the applicant is a person aggrieved to file a petition for rectification. as per the provisions of section 21 of the act, any person may oppose an application for registration, whereas an application for rectification can be filed only by a person aggrieved. 38. any trader who is ..... said trade mark force 10. it is also pertinent to mention that this registration being more than 10 years old and duly renewed is conclusively valid under section 32 of the act which confers upon the respondent exclusive right to use the said trade mark in relation to their goods to the exclusion of all others. 25. the ..... 13.03.1963 and is still valid and subsisting. the applicant has acquired exclusive right to the use of the said trade mark within the meaning of section 28 of the act. 17. the applicants trade mark has become distinctive and is associated with the aforesaid goods mentioned on account of its long, continuous, extensive and exclusive use .....
Tag this Judgment!