Dunlop International Limited Vs. Glorious Investment Limited: 11 June 2025: IPDTMA/14/2024 (heard along with IPDTMA/15–21/2024):High Court at Calcutta,
Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur
Very Brief Facts:
Dunlop International Ltd. opposed the registration of the mark “DUNLOP” by Glorious Investment Ltd. in eight different trademark classes. The Registrar of Trademarks rejected Dunlop's oppositions and allowed Glorious Investment’s applications. Dunlop challenged these orders, alleging fraudulent assignment of trademarks, procedural irregularities, and that the orders were passed without a fair hearing, particularly while the predecessor company (Dunlop India Ltd.) was under liquidation.
Issues:
Whether the Registrar violated principles of natural justice by refusing adjournment and proceeding without a proper hearing.
Whether the assignments to Glorious Investment Ltd. were valid in light of Dunlop India Ltd.'s liquidation. Whether the Registrar's orders were legally sustainable, given their lack of reasoning and failure to consider material facts and applicable law.
Discussion by Judge:
The Court held that the Registrar violated the principles of natural justice by refusing a fair hearing and proceeding arbitrarily. The orders lacked proper reasoning and failed to address serious allegations regarding fraudulent assignments, misuse of procedural forms, and the legal effect of liquidation. The Court criticized the superficial findings on distinctiveness and the well-known status of the mark "DUNLOP." The Judge emphasized that procedural rules are meant to aid justice, not frustrate it.
Decision:All the impugned orders were set aside. The matters were remanded to the Registrar for fresh consideration, after giving a proper opportunity of hearing to all parties. The Registrar was directed to conclude the proceedings within three months from the communication of the Court's order. All legal and factual issues were kept open for decision afresh in accordance with law.
