Partly allowed

Pulak Mukharjee v. the Registrar of Trade Marks (Govt. of India)

Rajasthan HC1 Feb 2023CW/1182/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur accepted this writ petition and directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to decide the petitioner's pending trademark application for 'OPERACEF' in Class-5 within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to decide the pending trademark application No.2367400 within eight weeks.

Pulak Mukharjee Vs the Registrar of Trade Marks… — Intellectual Property | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/003280]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1182/2023

¶4

Pulak Mukharjee S/o Late Shree Haralal Mukharjee, Aged About 52 Years, R/o 1, Kailash Nikunj, Behind Deema Nursing Home Rani Baazar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Registrar Of Trade Marks (Govt. Of India), Near Chanakyapuri Overbridge, Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad (Guj.)

¶8

Tasmed (I) Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 45, New Timber Market Chandigarh. Through And Authorizing Representative/director

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.D. Bansal

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

01/02/2023

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed with the following

¶15

prayer :-

¶16

"It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the

¶17

Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition. Further, issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ/order directing the respondent no.1 to precede/dispose/ decide petitioner's application no.2367400 dated 20/07/2012 (Annex.2) for the registration of trademark "OPERACEF" in respect of class-5 in the name of petitioner".

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application for registration of trademark "OPERACEF" is pending consideration with the respondent No.1 for more than eleven years and he, therefore, prays that the respondent No.1 may be directed to decide the same at the earliest.

(2 of 2)

[2023/RJJD/003280]

[CW-1182/2023]

Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 to decide the pending application No.2367400 dated 20/07/2012 (Annex.2) for the registration of trademark "OPERACEF" in respect of class-5 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶23

The stay application and other pending applications, if any also stand disposed of.

¶24

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶25

174-SanjayS/-

Pulak Mukharjee v. the Registrar of Trade Marks (Govt. of India)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pulak Mukharjee v. the Registrar of Trade Marks (Govt. of India)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jabid Husain Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shyam Nursing College Vs State of Rajasthan

Maa Ashapura Gurukul Sikshan Sansthan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dhagal Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Pulak Mukharjee Vs the Registrar of Trade Marks

Pulak Mukharjee Vs the Registrar of Trade Marks