- Case number
- (T)CMA(TM) Nos.79 and 155 of 2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
Refusals of FRESHMENU as descriptive set aside as bereft of reasons. The order said only that the mark was objectionable under section 9 and was accordingly refused, and the grounds of decision obtained under Rule 36(1) added no more than that the mark was descriptive of the services. The Court held that notwithstanding Rule 36(1) it is incumbent on any authority exercising quasi-judicial power to specify its reasons; the grounds did not deal with the evidence of use that had been filed, and the proviso to section 9(1) on acquired distinctiveness was never considered at all.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice.