Allowed

Hyclone Laboratorie, Inc. v. Registrar of Trade Marks

Delhi HC10 Jan 2024C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM)/73/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal, the Delhi High Court addressed an application for trademark registration refusal under Section 9. The Court found the Registrar's decision erroneous because the Senior Examiner ignored documents proving the mark's usage. The refusal was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Senior Examiner to decide afresh within three months.

What did the court decide?

Refusal order dated 28th January 2019 set aside; matter remanded to Senior Examiner to decide afresh considering user documents within three months.

Hyclone Laboratorie, Inc. Vs Registrar of Trade Marks — Intellectual Property | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 73/2021

¶4

HYCLONE LABORATORIE, INC. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jithin M. George and Mr. Prashant Gupta, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC, Srish Kumar Mishra and Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Advocates.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶9

O R D E R % 10.01.2024

¶10

I.A. No.15359/2023 (under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for change of name of the Appellant)

¶11

During the pendency of the present proceedings, the Appellantcompany has amended their name from “Hyclone Laboratories Inc.” to “Hyclone Laboratories LLC”. A certified copy of the amended Articles of Association of Appellant, evidencing the change has been annexed with the application.

¶12

The application is allowed and disposed of. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.

¶13

C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 73/2021

¶14

The Appellant’s application No. 2448093 for registration of the

¶15

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 13/05/2024 at 15:17:50

¶16

device mark “ ” in class 01 has been refused under Section 9 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 by the Respondent on 28^th January, 2019.

¶17

As per the Statement of Grounds of Decision dated 08^th March, 2019, the mark is devoid of any distinctive character and the Appellant did not produce any documentary evidence in support of their user claim. Counsel for the Appellant states that the findings of Senior Examiner of Trademarks are erroneous as a detailed user affidavit was filed by the Appellant, along with a Form TM-M for amendment of application. He contends that these documents placed before the Trademarks Registry have not been considered by the Examiner.

¶18

The Court has examined Appellant’s Form TM-M amending their trademark application as well as the documents accompanied therewith to establish their claimed use of the mark. In the opinion of the Court, these documents ought to have been taken into consideration at the time of deciding the application for registration. The findings of the Senior Examiner are contrary to record, thereby vitiating the order of refusal dated 28^th January, 2019, read along with Statement of Grounds of Decision dated 08^th March, 2019.

¶19

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed with the following directions:

¶20

(a) Order dated 28^th January, 2019 read along with Statement of Grounds of Decision dated 08^th March, 2019, refusing registration of the trademark

¶21

¶22

“ ” is set aside.

¶23

(b) The matter is remanded back to the Senior Examiner of Trademarks to decide the matter afresh, taking into account Form TM-M and the documents accompanied therewith.

¶24

¶25

All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

¶26

The present appeal is disposed of.

¶27

Registry is directed to supply a copy of the present order to the Trade Marks Registry at [email protected] for compliance.

¶28

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶29

JANUARY 10, 2024 A

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 13/05/2024 at 15:17:50

Hyclone Laboratorie, Inc. v. Registrar of Trade Marks

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hyclone Laboratorie, Inc. v. Registrar of Trade Marks

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

Drolia Chemical Works Vs Sumit Kumar Drolia

C.K Enterprises Vs Mr. Sunny & Anr.

M/S Amritpal Singh Vs Shri Lal Babu Priyadarshi Trading as Sri Om Perfumery and Anr.

Certiline Srl, Via Piave, 8, 1-21100 Varese, Italy Vs Indigo Prints Pvt. Ltd. B-95, Flatted Factory Complex, Okhla PHASE-3, New Delhi

Tata Sons Private Limited & Ors. Vs Tushar Fulare

Huck International , Inc. Vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs