BRB Legal

IP Case Digest · Trade Marks Act s.20

Section 20, Trade Marks Act: case law

3 judgments of the Delhi High Court applying Trade Marks Act s.20, from 2023–2024, each with a headnote by BRB Legal.

3judgments
1court
2023–2024years

Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Registrar of Trade Marks, C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 147/2021

Delhi High Court · Set aside

Refusal under section 11 set aside after the position on the cited marks changed during the appeal. Proprietors of three cited marks consented to registration subject to restrictions which the appellant accepted, undertaking to amend its description of goods. One cited mark was restricted in use to two states and covered batteries and inverters, and as to another the appellant was the prior user with an entirely different description of goods and a different class of purchasers. Advertisement before acceptance directed under the proviso to section 20(1).

Arvind Medicare Pvt. Ltd. v. The Registrar of Trade Marks, Delhi, C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 112/2021

Delhi High Court · Set aside

Refusal under sections 9(1)(a), 9(1)(b), 11(1)(a) and 11(1)(b) set aside. The Statement of Grounds gave no reason why the word mark was not distinctive or was descriptive, and nearly a decade of use with documents on record showed acquired distinctiveness. Appeal allowed and the application sent to advertisement under the proviso to section 20.

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Registrar of Trade Marks, C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 22/2022

Delhi High Court · Set aside

Refusal under section 11(1)(a) and (b) set aside. Of the cited marks two were likely to be removed for non-renewal and one stood refused, while the only surviving citation was shown to be unused on e-commerce portals. The appellant already held a registration for a mark containing the same element, in use since 2011. Mark allowed to be advertised before acceptance under the proviso to section 20.

Other provisions of the Trade Marks Act

All 233 judgments on the Trade Marks Act, 1999 Search the IP Case Digest