Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
hon'ble shri justice s.jagadeesan, chairman: the petitioner filed op no.368 of 2003 on the file of high court of judicature at madras for rectification of the first respondents trade mark by removing the mark swastik registered under number 232283 in class 30 and cancel the same. by virtue of section 100 of the trade marks act, 1999, the said op was transferred to this appellate board and numbered as tra/42/2003/tm/ch. 2. the case of the petitioner is that in or about 1973 one mr. a.c.venkatachalapathi, the promoter and director of the first petitioner, originally started the business under the name and style swastiks chemical industries as a proprietory concern at bangalore, adopting the trade mark swastiks. in 1992 he inducted his son shri a.v.sridhar as a partner in the business and constituted the second petitioner firm under the name and style of m/s swastiks instant food products. the second petitioner firm took over the business of the first petitioner also as a going concern with its goodwill in the business and also with all tangible and intangible assets including rights under the registered and unregistered trade marks. the second petitioner adopted the trade mark swastiks along with the device of swastik in respect of various food products manufactured and marketed by them apart from the trade marks acquired from the first petitioner. the petitioners have got the registration of their mark under no. 330673 registered as of 15.11.1977 in respect of preparations .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
(circuit sitting at delhi) honble dr.raghbir singh, vice-chairman: 1. appeal nos. 1 to 10 of 1993 were filed in the high court of gujarat at ahmedabad and have been transferred to this board in terms of section 100 of the trade marks act, 1999 and numbered as ta no.240 to 249/04. 2. appellant filed application nos.423258 to 423267 in class 7 on 16.6.1984 for registration of label mark consisting of word field marshal in different indian languages. the specification of goods in all the 10 applications are diesel oil engines (not for land vehicles) and parts thereof, centrifugal pumps, submersible pumps, electric motors (not for land vehicles), mono block, foot valve being all goods included in class 7 and the user claimed is since the year 1975. the mark was advertised in the trade marks journal no.960 dated 1.6.1989. 3. first respondent filed opposition on 28.7.1989 contending inter-alia that they are the prior user of the mark being the registered proprietor of trade mark no.228867 dated 13.5.1965 in class 7 for the specification of goods reading as flour mills, circulating and centrifugal pumps, couplings for machines, pulleys included in class 7 and valves (parts of machines). they submitted that the impugned mark is objectionable under sections 11(a), 11(e) and 12(1) of the act and also prayed for the exercise of discretion vested in the tribunal under section 18(4) of the act in their favour 4. appellant filed their counter statement on 20.3.1990 controverting the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
raghbir singh, vice-chairman, j. 1. c.o. nos. 20 and 21 of 1989 filed in the high court of delhi under sections 46 and 56 read with section 107 of the trade and merchandise marks act, (hereinafter referred to as the act) have been transferred to this board in terms of section 100 of the trade marks act, 1999 and numbered as tea nos. 128 and 129/04/tm/del. 2. tra/128 relates to rectification of the register in relation to trade mark 'taj mahal', label under no. 387177 and tra/129 relates to trade mark 'taj mahal' word per se under no. 338004 both in relation to class 30 registered in the name of the respondent. 3. the cases were listed for hearing on 2.11.04 in the sitting of the board held at new delhi. since the material facts and the legal issues involved in both the cases are the same, it was decided with the concurrence of both the counsel that the arguments and conclusions made and arrived at in tra/128 shall be adopted in relation to tra/129 also. learned counsel shri s.k. bansal with shri ajay amitabh suman appeared on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel shri amarjit singh appeared on behalf of the respondent. 4. petitioner claims that he is the proprietor of the trade mark consisting of device of 'taj mahal' label in relation to basmati rice on account of its adoption in year 1978 and had been continuously using the same thereafter. the mark has become distinctive and associated with the goods of the petitioner on account of its long continuous and extensive .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
circuit bench sitting at delhi order (no.195/2011) prabha sridevan, chairman: 1. the respondent applied for registration of the mark taj and the device taj mahal in respect of rice for export to australia under no.515949 in class 30. it was advertised before acceptance in journal no.1106 dated 1-5-1996. the appellant opposed it. but the registration was ordered. therefore the aggrieved opponent has filed this appeal. 2. this is the second round of litigation. in the first round, the 2nd respondent had been granted registration of the mark by order dated 14-3-2000. the appellant filed an appeal before the delhi high court in c.m. 370/2000. the learned judge commented that the 2nd respondent had proceeded on a weak wicket and ..had misdirected himself . the matter was remanded for reconsideration by order dated july 31, 2000, allowing the parties to supplement their pleadings. 3. as it happened, the matter was heard by the same officer, and he again ordered registration. the proceedings are governed by the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 (act in short). the 2nd respondent thought that section 55 of the act applies to a person who had no place of business within india and who was actually importing from india. it does not. this one factor really vitiates the entire order as we shall see hereafter. this really clinches the case, so the grounds relating to prior user or special circumstance are really of no merit. 4. the basic facts are, one sid varma and ms praveen varma .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
(circuit bench sitting at mumbai) order (no.171/2010) s. usha, vice-chairman 1. appeal arises out of the order dated 17.11.2008 dismissing opposition no. bom-167475 and allowing application no. 1132727 in class 5 to proceed to registration under the provisions of the trade marks act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the act.). the appellant has filed m.p.no.218/09 to stay the operation of the order of respondent no.2 dated 17.11.2008. 2. the respondent no. 1 herein filed an application for registration of the trade mark cororange in class 5 in respect of pharmaceutical and medicinal preparation under no. 1132727 on 11.09.2002 claiming user since 20.11.2002. the said application was advertised in the trade marks journal no. mega 4 dated 04.10.2003 at page no. 1324. 3. the appellant herein filed the notice of opposition on the ground that they are leading and established manufacturers and dealers of pharmaceutical products for the last several years. in the year 1971, they bonafidely and honestly adopted the trade mark dexorange . the appellants are the registered proprietors of the trade mark dexorange under no. 269335 in class 5. the said trade mark was assigned to m/s warde pharmaceuticals pvt. ltd., who later on re-assigned to the present appellant on 01.01.1989. the registration is subsisting and still in force. the appellants are the owners of the artistic work and have obtained copyright registration in the label and carton under nos. a-12173/74 and a-1055174. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
honble ms. s. usha, technical member: the above rectification petition has been filed for removal of the trade mark albaik under no.1029413 under section 47/57/125 of the trade marks act, 1999 (hereafter referred to as the act). the applicant had also taken out a miscellaneous petition no.76 of 2007 to stay/injunct the effect and operation of the trade mark registration certificate. 2. the brief facts of the case are as under:- a) the applicant was created in the year 1975. in the year 1987, the trade marks albaik and albaik chick logo were introduced as service marks to the public. the said marks were registered in the saudi arabia in 1992. the applicant has 34 restaurants in various countries like kingdom of saudi arabia, egypt and uae. the applicant had the trade mark registered in india in the year 2003 under no.1237718 in class 42 in respect of restaurant. the applicant is also the proprietor of the trade mark elbaik with the device of hat bearing application no.778166 as of 13th november, 1997 in respect of meat, fish, poultry and game, preserved dry and cooked food, edible oils and fats and the application is pending registration. b) the applicant came to know about the adoption of the impugned trade mark by the respondent and filed this instant application for rectification. the respondent had adopted the trade mark with the knowledge of the applicants mark and obtained registration by fraud. the respondent was running the business under the name and style of palace .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
(circuit bench at kolkata) honble shri z. s. negi, chairman: this appeal, being t.m.a. no. 10 of 1997 filed under section 109 of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the act) before the high court at calcutta, is directed against the order dated 1.5.1997 passed by the assistant registrar of trade marks whereby he dismissed the opposition and allowed the application for registration to proceed to registration. 2. it is the case of the appellant that the respondent no.1on 20.2.1987 filed application no.467971 in class 10 for registration of the label mark consisting of the word pony and the device of pony claiming user since february, 1986 in respect to baby soothers, baby feeders and nipples for feeding bottles and the said application was accepted and advertised in the trade marks journal no. 999 dated 16th january, 1991 at page 1208. the appellant filed opposition no. cal- 2322 against the application for registration on the grounds, inter alia, that the appellant was the prior adopter and user of the trade mark pony and device of pony and therefore the respondent no.1 could not claim to be the proprietor of the mark applied for registration; that the appellant was the registered proprietor of trade mark pony and the device of pony under nos. 389762, 389764, 452598 and 452599 in class 26 in respect of safety pins, buttons of all kinds, etc.; that it was also registered proprietor in india in relation to the said trade mark and device in class .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
honble s. chandrasekaran, technical member: this is an appeal under section 117a (2) of the patents act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the act) by nokia corporation being the appellant challenging the order of the controller of patents dated 26.09.2007 passed in the matter of patents application no.1857/chenp/2003. the appellant has alongwith the appeal filed a miscellaneous petition for interim stay of the impugned order. 2. the appellant has filed an international pct application in epo on 28.05.2001 which has been numbered as pct/ep01/06069. based on this international pct application, the appellant has entered into the national phase of selected designated countries including india within the period prescribed under pct. accordingly the national phase application filed on 27.11.2003 by the appellant has been accorded patent application no.1859/chenp/2003. due to non-compliance of office requirements, the respondent passed an order refusing the grant of patent. hence the above appeal. 3. the respondent who is the controller of patents had examined this national phase application and issued the first examination report calling for the details of the national phase application filed in other countries based on the international pct application. the appellant had submitted the details of the national phase application filed in other countries and had mentioned the filing date of the national phase application in india as 28.05.01 being the international filing date of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
(circuit bench ahmedabad) hon'ble shri z.s.negi, vice- chairman: these appeals under section 91 of the trade marks act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the act) are directed against the three orders all dated 9.5.2005 passed by the assistant registrar of trade marks, ahmedabad, whereby he treated the opposition nos. amd-190624, amd-190625 and amd-190626 as time barred and disposed them of as rejected and, accepted for registration the application nos. 630740,630742 and 630743b. 2. the appellant is stated to be a company, engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing consumer and industrial products and services for the last few decades which had adopted various trade marks such as nirma, super nirma and nilam for different goods covered under different classes and obtained registration of about 85 trade marks which are renewed, valid and subsisting till today. the appellant has also made about 179 applications for registration of trade marks nirma, super nirma and nilam under various classes and the same are pending registration. similarly, the applications for registration of trade marks in about 17 other countries of the world are pending. the appellant has got the numerous label marks nirma registered under the copyright act, 1957. it is the contention of the appellant that the respondent no.1 had made three applications no. 630740, 630742 and 630743b for registration of trade mark nirman under classes 24, 7 and 23, respectively. the said applications were .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the appellant is carrying on an old and established business as manufacturer and dealer in electric lamps, lighting, fittings accessories, kitchen appliances and kitchen wares and domestic appliances, etc. 3. ..... . in the light of this dictum, the finding by respondent no.2 that the respondent no.1 was under no burden to lead any evidence with regard to the deception or confusion is contrary to law propounded by the apex court in the above referred case .....
Tag this Judgment!