- Case number
- CMA(TM) 9/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
The burden of proving service lies on the Registry. An opponent who asserts that the counter statement was never served makes a negative assertion and cannot be asked to prove the impossible; a statement uploaded on the Registry's website saying it was served by email is not adequate proof, and the Registry never produced the email itself. The availability of rectification is no answer to a breach of natural justice.
Disposition
Allowed. The order declaring the opposition abandoned set aside and the matter remanded to the Trade Marks Registry for de novo consideration.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.