Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... produced those documents at the time of registration, since the registration was immediately attacked by its ..... the registration by financial times was immediately attacked and the evidence produced was insufficient here the registration ..... the registration in class 3 the user claimed is from 1960 and as regards the ..... the difficulties of the respondent in producing evidence of use in 1961 when the registration ..... , adhesive materials (stationery), ribbons for printing, calculating tables, tickets, stencil sets, writing sets, document holders, office machinery; trays and racks, all included in class 16.xerox the document company09546220photographic, electrophotographic, photo-mechanical, electrostatographic and thermographic apparatus and instruments; display machines (for use in producing a permanent visual record or copy); optical apparatus; photographic apparatus; ..... and apparatus all included in class 9.xerox01217823films (sensitized); chemical products used in industry and plastics included in class 1.xerox07217824printing machines, plates and drums tehrefor; parts and fittings of the foregoing goods included in class 7.xerox01155627developers consisting of a mixture of electroscopic powder and granular material used for producing powder images in making electrophotographic copies, toners comprising llectroscopic powder ..... the times publishing house had already got the title financial times approved in 1984 by the authority under the present registration of books act ..... registration on 27.02.1989 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the impugned trade mark on the date of application was bound to cause confusion and deception among the public as the applicant is a prior user and therefore the registration is in contravention of section 11 of the act ..... the respondent thus cannot be the proprietor of the trade mark and the registration is therefore in contravention of section 18 of the act ..... the registration is in contravention of the provisions of section 9 of the act ..... , respondent was relied on to say that though the respondents claim user since 1996 there is nothing on record to prove the same and therefore the registration has been obtained by false statement. ..... the respondent has never used the impugned trade mark in respect of the goods for which the registration ..... the registration of the impugned trade mark are being obtained by playing fraud upon the registrar ..... the registration has been obtained by fraud by making false and misleading statements and concealing material facts and matters before the ..... the registration has therefore been obtained by ..... the registration is lawful, ..... the registration has been made ..... limited, defendant plaintiff has neither produced any evidence regarding foreign registrations or sales of their tiger beer in foreign countries, nor they have produced any substantial evidence to show prima facie that the extent of sale of their product in india is so enormous that the word tiger has assumed secondary significance that it denotes their product ..... the applicants have filed invoice from the year 1989 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... in the evidence in support of the opposition the appellant who was the opponent submitted that they had adopted the distinctive trade mark safari from the year 1994-95 and had also applied for the registration of the trade mark ..... the appellant is aggrieved by the registration of the trademark safari in respect to locks, seat belts, nuts, bolts and screws, all being articles of metals included in class 6 vide application no ..... kumar jain , it was held that the registration obtained by false statement and fraud deserves to be removed from the register. ..... during the pendency of the registration it was incorporated into a private limited company, safari cycles ..... on this ground alone, the registration ought to have been refused. ..... it was contended that the registration obtained under application no ..... in the present case, except for stating in the statement of the case that the impugned registration was obtained by playing fraud on the registrar of trade mark as well as the honest members of the trade and business, no material was placed on record to support the said ..... had applied for registration in the year 1979 and obtained the same in the year 1988. ..... it was held that any amendment which will materially change the nature of the application could not be allowed. 17 ..... an amendment of opposition was sought for on the ground that the advertisement was not proper ..... , this board held that an amendment of date of user filed on tm16 filed after advertisement before admission was held to be not bonafide .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the respondents case is that the registration must stand ..... conditions should be satisfied when it is made otherwise than in connection with the goodwill of the business , (a) an application should be made by the assignee to the registry; (b) this application should seek directions with respect to the advertisement of the assignment to advertise it in such a form and manner and within such period as the registrar may direct; (c) this application should be made not later than expiration of six months from the date on which the assignment is made; and (d) if it can not be made within those six ..... by these miscellaneous petitions, the respondent seeks to file the deed of assignment to show that the impugned mark was assigned to shell brands international ag from the respondent herein and therefore appropriate amendment must be effected. 9. ..... thus, the applicant it is not the person aggrieved under the act as required under section 47 of the act which is a pre-requisite for filing the rectification application ..... in respect of identification verification services, namely, providing authentication of personal identification information, software development, data analysis, data conversion services included in class 42 of the trade marks act, 1999 claiming use since 2003. ..... when the trade marks act extended its protection to service marks, the applicant has filed the following applications:- application ..... the assignment is without goodwill and is contrary to section 42 of the trade marks act, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... in the ayyangar committee report it was said, it would be of advantage therefore if the applicant is required to state whether he has made any application for a patent for the same or substantially the same invention as in india in any foreign country or countries, the objections, if any, raised by the patent offices of such countries on the ground of novelty or unpatentability or otherwise and the amendments directed to be made or actually made to the specification or claims in the foreign country or countries. 61. ..... the learned counsel submitted that the applicant chose not to file either post grant opposition proceedings or even revocation proceedings under section 64 of the indian patents act within three years from the date of grant of the patent but moved an application for revocation almost four years after grant of the patent, which is clearly beyond the limitation period of three years prescribed by the limitation act.the learned counsel submitted that the grant of a patent has a limited term of 20 years from the filing date. ..... ' (october 1989) unless these extracts contain some inventive insight at the priority date, the patent must be invalid, because i consider that the problem of compliance has, on the evidence, always been a problem. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the registration has been obtained in contravention of the provisions of the section 11 of the act as the respondents have played fraud on the registrar. ..... the respondent is not the proprietor of the trade mark and therefore the registration is a bar under section 18 of the act. 16. ..... the respondent had dishonestly adopted the trade mark with the knowledge of the applicants adoption and use and therefore the registration has been obtained in bad faith. ..... accordingly, ora/253/2008 is partially allowed with a direction that the registration shall be restricted for sale in the state of maharashtra for which necessary steps are to be taken by the respondents. 43. ..... sathishkumar submitted that the impugned trade mark under no.520762 in class 24 was filed on 5.12.1989 claiming user since 01.01.1992. ..... the invoices are of the year 1989 and so on. ..... the application has been filed on 05.12.1989 claiming user since 01.10.1989. ..... the respondents have been using the trade mark since 1989. ..... the application has been fined on 05.12.1989 claiming user since 01.10.1989. ..... this shows that their adoption has been on the 30.09.1989 atleast. ..... at page 54 of the application, paaneri have submitted their advertisement paper cutting dated 30.09.1989 to prove their use. ..... the applicants conceived and adopted the trade mark paaneri since the year 1989. ..... the first advertisement is dated 30.09.1989 which is an announcement of their inauguration of their shop paneri. ..... paaneri had been using the trade mark since 1989. 28. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the letter dated 12.10.2002 is the objection of the respondent to the roc that the applicant has objections to the registration of any company having words sahajanand laser ..... 2001 when the applicant sought registration of incorporation, the applicant was asked to change its name by the registrar of companies because of the similarity to the respondents name. ..... it is stated that accepting the respondents objection to the applicants name the registrar of companies had declined registration of sahajanand laser technology (india) ..... the respondent has started business under the identical name sahajanand laser technology pvt ltd.dhirajlal kotadia who was the partner in the firm is the director of the respondents company and he has started the company to take advantage of the goodwill of the trademark/trade ..... the applicant had attempted to get registration of the name sahajanand laser technology (india) ..... on 12.9.2001 this firm filed an application for registration of trademark no.1044110 claiming user from 3.6.1997 ..... they concerned the grant of registration in favour of nbrm and krbl in respect of identical device marks of taj mahal for rice for export ..... when the applicant sought registration of its company sahajanand laser technology (india) ..... there is no dishonesty on the part of the respondent we are entitled to invoke our discretion under s.12 of the trade marks act, 1999 in favour of the respondent. 18. ..... amendment applications have been filed to change the user from 3.6.1997 to 28.7.1993. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the opponent company had coined this word yera as early as in the year 1952 and by the time the petitioner had applied for the registration of the word yera, the opponent company had already spent lacs of rupees in popularizing the word by way of advertisement and the sales of the opponent had also run into several lacs. ..... (circuit bench at new delhi) honble shri z.s.negi, vice-chairman : the above appeal under sub-section (2) of section 109 of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the act) is directed against the order dated 27.09.1994 passed by the deputy registrar of trade marks, delhi allowing the application no.421242 filed by the first respondents to proceed to registration and dismissing the opposition no.del-5026 filed by the appellants. ..... the opponent company, which manufactured glassware including jars and bottles, and held registration of the same trade mark yera in respect of various goods objected to the registration of the trade mark ..... moreover in deciding whether a particular trade mark is likely to deceive or cause confusion that duty is not discharged by arriving at the result by merely comparing it with the trade mark which is already registered and whose proprietor is offering opposition to the registration of the mark. ..... takahashi has annexed, amongst others, copies of certain invoices, composition of net sales by area and product group1984 to 1989, consolidated balance sheets 1988-89 and five-year summary of selected financial data. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... the appellant herein filed a notice of opposition on 8.1.1990 on the ground that the registration of the impugned mark is contrary to the provisions of sections 9, 11(a), 11(e), 12(1) and 18(1) of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the said act). ..... having done so, the deputy registrar further accepted the application of the second respondent and directed to proceed with the registration. ..... in this case the deputy registrar has simply accepted the application of the second respondent for registration of the impugned mark without assigning any reason and no where in the impugned order he has considered the evidence produced by the second respondent. ..... even assuming that rule 53(2) is mandatory and the opposition of the appellant is to be rejected, still the deputy registrar owes an obligation to consider the application of the second respondent for registration of the impugned mark on merits. ..... the only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the deputy registrar has proceeded to reject the opposition by dismissing the application filed by the appellant for producing the evidence on the ground that the belated evidence filed by the appellant is against the ambit and scope of rule 53(2) and cannot be taken on record for consideration. ..... the said mark was advertised in the trade marks journal no.969 dated 16.10.1989 at page 931. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB
..... even assuming that the registration had been obtained with bonafide intention to use the same in respect of goods for which the registration had been obtained, but still the same has not been used by the first respondent from the inception of the registration or atleast for a period of five years and one month prior to the date of filing of application in respect of the goods for which the registration had been obtained. ..... by way of evidence through the affidavit, the petitioner relying upon the evidence of the first respondent let in before the civil court has now claimed that the first respondent has not used their impugned mark for the purpose of manufacturing or selling the goods specified in their registration certificate and as such their mark is remaining in the register of trade marks without any sufficient cause and on the ground of non user as contemplated under section 46(1) (b) of the act the mark has to be rectified. ..... the petitioners, right from 1973 through their predecessors in title and by themselves have been extensively using the said trade marks and their turnover in the year 1989-90 was rs.33,33,124.88 and the same increased to rs.5,10,37,565.13 in the year 1998-99. .....
Tag this Judgment!