- Case number
- C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 39/2022
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- C. Hari Shankar
- Outcome
- Set aside
Headnote
Order deeming an opposition abandoned under Rule 45(2) for late evidence set aside. Rule 45(1) requires the evidence to be left with the Registrar, not filed, and Rule 8 gathers making, serving, leaving, sending and paying into a single nebulous parenthesis. Where a provision affecting a valuable commercial right is ambiguous, the benefit of the ambiguity goes to the citizen. The opponent had tried to e-file on the last day, when the Registry website was not functioning, couriered the evidence the next day, and it reached the office three days late. That attempt falls within the broad embrace of Rule 8. Procedural provisions are owed deference but cannot be read so rigidly as to eviscerate substantive rights, the right to oppose being as sacrosanct as the right to seek registration. The Court expressly left open whether the Registrar has any power to extend time under section 131 read with Rules 8, 45 and 109.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.