This is a judgment from the High Court at Calcutta, Commercial Division, involving three separate but related appeals (IPDTMA No. 82 of 2023, IPDTMA No. 83 of 2023, and IPDTMA No. 1 of 2024) filed by Visa International Ltd., Garden Silk Mills Private Limited, and others against Visa International Service Association and other respondents.
The appeals challenge the authority of the Associate Manager, to pass certain orders in opposition proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The appellants argue that the Associate Manager,, who passed the impugned orders, was not authorized to do so as their appointments were contractual and limited to specific periods, which had expired by the time the orders were passed.
hey also contend that the organizational structure of the Trade Marks Registry does not include a post for Associate Manager, and the Recruitment Rules of 2011 do not mention such a position.
The respondents argue that the Associate Managers were appointed through a public notice and were authorized to hear contested matters and pass reasoned decisions. They also submit that the Central Government has the power to appoint officers of any designation to perform the functions of the Registrar under the Trade Marks Act.
The Hon'ble Court, after considering the arguments and evidence presented, concludes that the Associate Managers were not empowered to pass quasi-judicial orders as their appointments were contractual and limited in time.
Furthermore, the quasi-judicial functions under the Trade Marks Act are to be performed independently, not under the superintendence and direction of the Registrar. The court sets aside and quashes the impugned orders and remands the matters to the Registrar of Trade Marks for a fresh decision by a competent officer, with a directive to dispose of the matter within six months.
The judgment highlights the importance of proper authorization and the legal framework for the appointment of officers to pass quasi-judicial orders under the Trade Marks Act. It also underscores the principle that if there is an inherent lack of jurisdiction, the plea can be taken up at any stage and in collateral proceedings.
Case Citation: Visa International Ltd Vs Visa International Service. :02.08.2024 : IPDTMA No. 82 of 2023: Calcutta High Court: The Hon’ble Justice Krishna Rao. H.J.
Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman
IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney]
