Oppositions are an integral part of Trademark prosecution.
Forming a large chunk of the matters addressed by the Trademark
Registry, this process is vital to the grant or refusal of the
registration grant. Dealt with under S. 21 of the Trade Marks Act,
1999 it is an important tool to exercise one's right opposing
marks that are similar or seemingly infringing to one' mark.
Deliberating upon some provisions with relation to hearings in
oppositions is the case of Sunij Pharma Pvt. Ltd v. Sun
Pharmaceuticals 2008(37) PTC 691(IPAB).
The appeal from the order of the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks
deciding upon an opposition matter, deemed the opposition as
abandoned in terms of Rule 50(2) of the Trade Mark Rules, 2002. The
opposition challenged the label mark containing the word
"SUN" applied for under Class 5. A notice of opposition
was filed by Sunij Pharma Pvt. Ltd. objecting to the filing of
registration. The opposition notice was replied to and the
averments were denied. An affidavit of evidence was called upon, in
support of the opposition, however the same was replied to stating
a lack of desire to adduce any evidence. Sun Pharmaceuticals, the
applicants to the mark were represented at the opposition hearing
and an order was passed, aggrieved by which the present appeal
The grounds raised in the appeal are based on the contention
that the written arguments sent by Sunij Pharma had not been
considered by the Deputy Registrar in his hearing, and this was
denied by Sun Pharmaceuticals. The counsel for Sunij deliberating
upon the powers of the Registrar to extend the time for filling
evidence stated that Rule 50 was directory and not mandatory in
nature. They also submitted that the trade mark could not be
registered in view of Sections 11, 12 and 18(1) of the Act. The
submission on the power of the Registrar to extend the time to file
evidence was vehemently opposed, stating that no infirmity existed
in the impugned order being passed.
The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) considering the
arguments rendered by either side, took into consideration the
fulfillment of the prerequisites to file an opposition, while also
looking into the contents of Rule 50.The letter sent to the Deputy
Registrar was also looked into The Court looking at these noted
that two requirements needed to be fulfilled, of the non-filling of
the evidence to the Registrar, which it did and the intention to
rely on facts of the notice of opposition, which it did not convey.
The Board concluded that the requirements of the Rule had not been
complied with. Rule 56, dealing with hearing and decision, was also
The Board noted that the main contention of Sunij Pharma was
that the Registrar had the powers to extend time and Rule 50 being
mandatory in nature. The Board found that an extension of time to
file evidence had not been sought, nor had they appeared before the
Registrar. The appellant was stated not to have complied with any
of the requirements of the procedure. The board pronounced the
Registrar' order to be well founded and in place.
This article enunciates the recent, much awaited, and landmark judgment delivered on September 16, 2016 by Hon'ble Delhi High Court throwing light on the important provisions of the Copyright Act, 1962.
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion recently issued an office memorandum pursuant to receiving representations from various stakeholders for guidance with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957.
An Invention Disclosure Form is the documentation of the invention. This is a means to document particulars of your invention and submitting it to the patent attorney who is filing your patent application.
The Patents Act 1970, along with the Patents Rules 1972, came into force on 20th April 1972, replacing the Indian Patents and Designs Act 1911. The Patents Act was largely based on the recommendations of the Ayyangar Committee Report headed by Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar. One of the recommendations was the allowance of only process patents with regard to inventions relating to drugs, medicines, food and chemicals.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).