Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... minister, the same state government could not subsequently reverse the order or recall it. the court, while considering the question whether an order made by the revenue minister acting as the state government could be subsequently cancelled by the state government?, observed that every tribunal has inherent power to correct its own error, provided, of course, ..... the appellate board ought not to grant any relief as sought for in the instant application on the grounds for rectification raised under sections 9 and 11 of the act. it is denied that the appellate board has completely bypassed the alleged crucial issue and has not considered, adverted to and not even decided and on the ..... of and be detrimental to the distinctive character and repute of the applicants mark and as such the impugned registration is hit by section 11(2) of the act. 3. ms. archna goyal, constituted attorney of the respondent no.1 at the outset of her affidavit reply dated 11.11.2009 submitted that this appellate board .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... accordingly not tenable. (d)the other objections raised are based on section 9 and 11. the word ambika is a common feminine name essential by derived from a hindu goddess by that name. adoption and use of such a name as a trade mark is quite legitimate and qualifies for registration subject to it being distinctive. in ..... . law protects an earlier trade mark unconditionally against later applications to register identical marks for identical good and the only exception is provided in section 12 of the act. in these proceedings, all the marks of the respondent except ambi under no. 131751 was prior to the applicant. further, the respondents mark under the trade ..... distinctiveness. in our view the objection raised under section 9 is not well founded. (e) finally, objection has also been raised under section 11 of the act to attack the respondents trade mark. we do not understand the basis of this objection. the applicant have secured registration for ambi many years after the respondent have .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... corporation v. registrar of trade marks where it is seen that the registrar had allowed renewal for three successive periods. 21. the respondents also relied on 1983 ptc 55 a. abdul karim sahib and sons., etc. v. the assistant registrar of trade marks and submitted that ..... is due to expire especially when the registered proprietor himself does not show anxiety to protect his property right. intellectual property rights are bound by time and the act also indicates that the procedures should have a time frame. therefore we are not sure if merely because a non-renewed mark remains on the register, without ..... of disputes regarding the apportionment of the compensation. in such an eventuality, he may approach the collector to make a reference to the court under section 30 of the act . the effect of non-issuance of notice here is relevant. 20. on the side of the respondent, the learned senior counsel referred to 1998 ptc (18) whirlpool .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... applies to this case. 27. we therefore are of the view that the rectification application is not maintainable as the provisions contemplated under section 124 of the act has not been complied with. in the above circumstances, the rectification application is dismissed with no order as to costs. miscellaneous petition no.127/2009 and ..... civil court for filing an application for rectification. the counsel finally submitted that the impugned registration is in violation of the provision of section 9 of the act. 19. the learned counsel for the respondent contended that the user was proved before the registrar and based on that the registration was granted and denied ..... no jurisdiction to decide the same. the rectification application has been filed without appropriate leave being granted as mandated by section 124 (1)(b)(ii) of the act and is liable to be dismissed. the applicant can not file this application without showing and obtaining prima facie satisfaction of the court. 9. the applicants .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the ground wherein they had stated that the registrar had held that the marks are not deceptively similar and having rejected the objection under various provisions of the act should have allowed the registration. 12. the learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the rival trade marks were not similar and brought to our ..... over the impugned trade mark. the 2nd respondent finally stated that the registration being a bar under the provisions of sections 9,11, 12 and 18 of the act, the registration be rejected. 4. the applicant / appellant herein filed their counter statement on form tm -6 denying the various allegations made in the notice of opposition ..... in taking steps against the infringers. the appellants trade mark is neither distinctive nor is capable of being distinguished as per section 9(1) (a) of the act. the use of the impugned mark by the appellant would be detrimental to the reputation of the 2nd respondents well established trade mark . the appellants have copied .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... and the original copy of the same was filed on 16 september 2010. as per the provisions of section 57 to 59 of the act, a complete specification can be amended by a patentee by way of correction, explanation and disclaimer and for the purpose of incorporation of actual fact and therefore the respondent humbly ..... is limiting the scope of the claims and requested that the revised claims filed under section 58 of the act may be considered rather than revoking the entire patent. here the respondent has made the amendment proposal in the claims along with the filing of the counter statement on 12-03-2010 without following the ..... if there is a failure to disclose all the relevant matters, amendment will be refused. secondly, amendment will be allowed provided the amendments are permitted under the act and no circumstances arise which would lead the court to refuse the amendment. thirdly, it is in the public interest that amendment is sought promptly. thus, in cases where a patentee delays .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... submitted that the respondents products were made out of bosewellia serrata extract an ingredient of drug. in this regard, the counsel relied on section 13 of the act. the counsel also relied on the drug licence where the ingredients were mentioned. 24. the counsel drew our attention to the counter-statement filed by the respondent ..... an aggrieved person has filed the instant rectification application on the following grounds:- a) the registration granted is contrary to the provisions of trade and merchandise marks act, 1958. b) the registrar erred in granting registration for the word sallaki which is a generic term and describes a particular herb in sanskrit. c) the ..... been filed for removal of the trade mark sallaki under registration no.385295 in class 5. the applicant herein is a partnership firm registered under the partnership act, 1932. the applicant submits that the word sallaki which has been derived from the sanskrit word shallaki describes the herb used in the product and cannot .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... 38. in section 80 of the principal act, the following proviso shall be inserted at the end, namely;- provided that the party ..... for a patent, or for amendment of a specification (if within the prescribed time the applicant so requires) an opportunity to be heard before exercising adversely to the applicant any discretion vested in the controller by or under this act. the amendment to the section 80 has been made by the patents (amendment) act, 2002 as given below:- ..... a patent, the report of the examiner received by the controller is adverse to the applicant or requires any amendment of the application or of the specification to ensure compliance with the provisions of this act or of the rules made there under, the controller, before proceeding to dispose of the application in accordance .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the defects of the original patent specification. while doing so, respondent no.1 has completely violated the provisions of section 59 of the patents act, 1970. the law relating to amendments does not permit widening/broadening of the disclosure/claims. in the present case the scope of protection as well as the disclosures in the ..... matter which would alter the scope of protection. the counsel submitted that section 21 and 22 of uk patent and design act 1907 and section 29 of patents act 1949 which relate to amendment of specification with leave of comptroller are similar to the provisions under section 57 read with section 59 of the indian patents ..... act ,1970. 22. the counsel relied on the following judgments relating to amendments of the specification and claims during prosecution of the application : (i) in application for revocation of letters patent no.308932 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... this firm filed an application for registration of trademark no.1044110 claiming user from 3.6.1997. on 13.3.2006 the firm became sahajanand laser technology limited. amendment applications have been filed to change the user from 3.6.1997 to 28.7.1993. 5. the applicant has claimed prior user of the mark and the ..... in 1996 ptc 16 montari overseas ltd., vs. montari industries ltd., the adoption of an identical name as the name of the company which stood registered under the companies act, 1956 was held to lack bonafide. the facts there are as follows: the plaintiff was one montari industries. it had several subsidiary concerns. the names of all these ..... companies contained the word montari. that was incorporated in 1983. the defendant was montari overseas incorporated in 1993. the court referred to section 20 of the companies act which provides that no company will be registered by a name by which a company in existence has been previously registered. in case where a company has been .....
Tag this Judgment!