Jagatjit Ind. Ltd. Vs. Intellectual Property Appellate Board & Ors.
The Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Section 23
Trade Mark - Notice of Opposition - Registration of - Extension of time -On an application filed by respondent No. 4 for extension of time for one month to the notice of opposition to the application for registration of time has been extended by the Registrar - It is evidenced by the letter dated 16.2.2004 - Any registration certificate granted prior to the 30 days extended period from 6.1.2004 would be violative of Section 23(1) of the Act - Appellate Board and the Division Bench of the High Court held to be clearly right in declaring that the registration certificate, having been issued on 13.1.2004, would be violative of Section 23(1)(a), and the register would have to be rectified by deleting the said trademark therefrom.
The Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Section 3 , Section 57 (4)
Jurisdiction - Registrar Trade Marks - Plea that the show cause notice dated 16.2.2005 under Section 57(4) of the Act was without jurisdiction as it was issued by the Registrar in Bombay and not by the authorities in Delhi where the application for registration of the trademark was made and all the subsequent proceedings took place repelled - Held that power to be exercised under Section 57(4) can only be exercised by the Registrar of Trade Marks himself - There is only one such Registrar and his registered office is in Bombay - Assistant Registrars in the other parts of the country including Delhi all act under the superintendence and directions of the Registrar, Bombay, as is clear from Section 3(2) of the Act.
The Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Section 57
Trade Mark Registration - Rectification Proceeding - Jurisdiction - Held that where proceedings for rectification of the register are pending before the filing of the suit for infringement in which the defendant pleads that the registration of the plaintiff's trademark is invalid, such proceedings may be made either before the Registrar or before the Appellate Board, in view of Section 57(1) and (2) of the Act - But, if rectification proceedings are to be instituted after the filing of such suit for infringement in which the defendant takes the plea that registration of the plaintiff's trademark is invalid, then rectification proceedings can only be taken before the Appellate Board and not before the Registrar.
The Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Section 125 (1) , Section 57 (4)
Trade Mark Registration - Rectification Proceeding - Suo motu power of Registrar - Section 125(1) would only apply to applications for rectification of the register, and not to the exercise of suo motu powers of the Registrar under Section 57(4) - If the Registrar is barred from undertaking a suo motu exercise under Section 57(4) to maintain the purity of the register, there could conceivably be cases where a defendant, after raising the plea of invalidity in a suit for infringement, chooses not to proceed with the filing of a rectification petition before the Appellate Board - This may happen in a variety of circumstances such as where, after raising the plea of invalidity in a suit for infringement, the matter is compromised and the defendant therefore does not file a rectification petition before the Appellate Board - Registrar's power to maintain the purity of the register of trademarks would still remain intact even in such cases.
Topic(s)-Trade Mark - Notice of Opposition - Trade mark rightly deleted