The petitioner filed a rectification petition seeking the removal of the trademark 'GARNISH' registered in favor of Garnish Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent No. 1) under Application no. 2342492 in Class 11. The petitioner argued that the trademark registration had expired and the statutory grace period for renewal had also passed.
The Court noted that the respondent had been validly served through their Trademark Agent. The petitioner had made several attempts to serve the respondent with the petition documents, but the attempts were unsuccessful as the respondent's address was found to be incorrect.
The Court observed that the trademark in question had expired on 04.06.2022, and the one-year grace period for renewal under Section 25(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 had elapsed. The Registrar of Trade Marks (Respondent No. 2) had issued a notice to the respondent about the expiry of the trademark, but no action was taken within the grace period.
The Court directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to remove the entry of the impugned mark from the Register of Trade Marks. The petitioner's rights and contentions on the merits of the dispute were kept open. The Registry was instructed to inform the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks about the order for compliance.
The High Court of Delhi ordered the removal of the expired trademark 'GARNISH' from the Register of Trade Marks, emphasizing the importance of timely renewal and the legal consequences of failing to do so.
Case Citation: Irvinder Kaur Chadha Vs Garnish Electronics:30.07.2024 : Irvinder Kaur Chadha Vs Garnish Electronics: 2024: DHC:5772: Delhi High Court: Mini Pushkarna. H.J.
Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman
IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney]
No comments:
Post a Comment