- Case number
- C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 26/2024
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Amit Bansal
- Outcome
- Set aside
Headnote
Refusal under section 9(1)(b) set aside. The objection rested on an erroneous assumption that the mark was a word mark: what was applied for was an artistic device using no word at all, and the allegedly descriptive word appeared only in the trade mark description forming part of the application, which the applicant agreed to amend. The devices were in fact used on the packaging of a product whose own mark had been registered since 1967, and documents evidencing use from January 2019 had been filed with the appeal.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.