Case: Cadbury India Ltd., Bombay Vs Hindustan Cocoa Products Ltd.. Trademark Tribunal

Party NameCadbury India Ltd., Bombay Vs Hindustan Cocoa Products Ltd.
CounselFor Appellant: Mr. M.J. Dawda, Advocate and For Respondents: Mr. Mohan Dewan, Advocate
JudgesS. G. Borkar, ARTM
IssueTrade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959 - Rules 55, 56
Citation1984 (4) PTC 35 (Reg)
Judgement DateJanuary 10, 1984
CourtTrademark Tribunal

Judgment:

S. G. Borkar, ARTM

The matter relates to a request on Form- TM-16 dated 15-7-1983 filed by RAM KRISHNA FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. (herein after referred to as the applicants) and an Interlocutory petition dated 28.7.1983 filed by HINDUSTAN COCOA PRODUCTS LTD. Bombay 400 026 (hereinafter referred to as the Hindustan Cocoa).

The applicants filed an application being application No. 324518 for registration of a trade mark consisting of the word PLUS per se in class 30 in respect of non-medicated confectionery, boiled sweets and toffees. The application was advertised before acceptance of proviso to section 20 (1) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the applicants agreed to convert the application into one for registration in Part B of the register and was advertised in the Trade Marks Journal No. 716 dated Ist April, 1979 on page 1162.

On 20th July, 1979 Cadbury India Ltd. having their business at Cadbury House, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Bombay- 400 026, (hereinafter referred to as the opponents) entered opposition to the aftersaid application on the grounds, inter alia, of deceptive similarity with their registered trade mark, No. 279497 B for PLUS in respect of food products. The applicants filed their counter statement in reply to the notice of opposition. The opponents filed their counter statement in reply to the notice of opposition. The opponents filed their evidence in support of opposition under Rule 53 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959. The applicants thereafter filed their evidence in support of application under Rule 54 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959. The applicants attention was drawn to Rule 55 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959. The applicants attention was drawn to Rule 55 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959 in this office letter TOP/3555 dated 27th July, 1982 whereby the opponents were called upon to file evidence in reply. In reply to the said notice, the opponents Agents, M/s. Remfry & Son in their letter dated 6-8-1982 addressed to the Register of Trade Marks, submitted as follows: - "We write with reference to official letter No. Top/3555 dated 27th July 1982. We respectfully request that the hearing be appointed for final disposal of the opposition on merits". The matter was fixed for main hearing on 10th November 1982. In the meanwhile the applicants filed an interlocutory petition dated 18-8-1982 seeking leave to take on record the affidavits of P.C. Chawla D.M. Chandwani and V. Bansal as evidence in support of application. The said petition was heard by me on 21.2. 1983 and by my order dated 8.3.1983. I allowed the Interlocutory petition, the operative part of which is as follows:" I therefore, allow the Interlocutory petition dated 18-8-1982 and direct that the 3 affidavits of P.C. Chawla, B.M. Chandwani and V. Bansal filed in the Trade Marks Registry on 22nd July, 1982 in connection with opposition No. BOM-3991 be taken on record as further evidence under Rule 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959. I further direct that the opponents shall be at liberty to...

To continue reading

Request your trial