Partly allowed

North Side Brewers Private Ltd. v. the Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Delhi HC6 May 2024C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM)/17/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses two matters. Firstly, it condones a delay of 53 days in filing a trademark appeal. Secondly, after the appellant withdraws the appeal to pursue a fresh application for the same mark, the court dismisses the present appeal, directing the fresh application to be examined on its merits.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 53 days condoned; Present appeal dismissed as withdrawn; Fresh application to be examined on merits.

North Side Brewers Private Ltd. Vs the Registrar of… — Company and Corporate | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~36

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 17/2024, I.A. 7200/2024, I.A. 7201/2024

¶4

NORTH SIDE BREWERS PRIVATE LTD ..... Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. John Mathew, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Appearance not given.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 06.05.2024

¶12

I.A. 7199/2024 (delay in filing the appeal)

¶13

For the grounds and reasons stated therein, the application is allowed and the delay of 53 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶14

Disposed of.

¶15

C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 17/2024

¶16

The Appellant had filed trademark application No. 5421811 in Class 43

¶17

for the device mark “ ”. On 27^th October, 2023,¹ the Registrar of trademarks deemed the application abandoned under Section 21(2) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 [referred to as ‘the Act’], as the Appellant had not filed counter statement to the notice of opposition, which, according to the

¶18

1 Impugned Order

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 11:34:23

¶20

records of the trademark registry, was served on the Appellant on 19^th July, 2023.

¶21

Although the Appellant assails the Impugned order, at the same time, they have applied for the subject mark afresh. In light of the above, Mr. John Mathew, counsel for the Appellant, after making some submissions, states that he would like to withdraw the present appeal and continue with the fresh application that he has filed which may be considered on its own merits.

¶22

In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Needless to say, the fresh application filed by the Appellant shall be dealt with and examined on its own merits in accordance with law.

¶23

Appeal along with pending applications stand disposed of.

¶24

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶25

MAY 6, 2024 nk

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 11:34:23

North Side Brewers Private Ltd. v. the Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

North Side Brewers Private Ltd. v. the Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alkem Laboratories Ltd. Vs Wings Novitas Healthcare LLP & Ors.

Karim Hotels Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Nizamuddin & Anr.

Dow International Technology Corporation & Ors. Vs Elixir Trading Pvt. Ltd.

North Side Brewers Private Ltd. Vs the Registrar of Trade Marks & Ors.

Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. Vs the Controller of Patents

Sporta Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs John Doe and Others