Case: Garware Synthetics Pvt. Limited, Bombay Vs Lucky Trading Co., Bombay. Trademark Tribunal

CounselFor Appellant: Mr. M. Basha instructed by Mr. S.C. Malhotra, Advocate and For Respondents: Mr. I.N. Kayser, Advocate
JudgesS. G. Borkar, ARTM
IssueTrade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959 - Rule 56; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Section 97(b)
Citation1983 (3) PTC 306 (Reg)
Judgement DateAugust 12, 1983
CourtTrademark Tribunal

Judgment:

S. G. Borkar, ARTM.

These proceedings arise out of an opposition under Section 21 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 by Garware Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. 135 Dr. Annie Basant Road, Worli, Bombay-18 (hereinafter referred to the opponents) to application No. 311354 filed in the name of a partnership firm Lucky Trading Co., 436 Katha Bazar, Bombay-9 (hereinafter referred to as the Applicants) in Class 28 in respect of 'Fishing Lines' included in Class 28 for registration of a Trade Mark consisting of the word Luckion and the device of a man catching fish as the essential features of the Trade Mark. The Application was advertised in the Trade Mark Journal No. 692 dated 1st April 1983.

The Application was filed on 3rd January 1976 and the applicants filed the counter statement in reply to the notice of opposition. The opponents did not file evidence under Rule 53 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959, but relied on the facts stated in the notice of opposition. The applicants filed evidence in support of the application and the matter was set down for hearing on 13.11.81. There after the opponents filed an interlocutory petition dated 15.6.82 for filing further evidence under Rule 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules. This application was allowed at the hearing on 7th October 1982, the operative part of which is as follows:

"I, therefore, allow the interlocutory petition dated 15.6.1982 by the opponents and take the affidavit of Shri Narayan Murthy and record as further evidence subject to filing TM--7 by the opponents accompanied by a petition for condonation of delay and payment of Rs. 106/- as costs to the applicants. The applicants should be at liberty to file rebuttal evidence within a month from the date hereof. But the applicants have not filed their rebuttal evidence within the time granted to them and the main matter was posted for hearing on 9th August 1983 where Mr. M. Basha advocate instructed by Shri S.C. Malhotra appeared for the opponents and Shri I.N. Kayser, advocate, appeared for the applicants.

Before the main matter was taken up for consideration, the learned advocate for the applicants Shri I.N. Kayser made an oral request for the evidence in reply to the further evidence which was taken on record at the hearing on the 7th October 1982. He undertook to file a request for the adjournment of the hearing and also wanted time to file the rebutal evidence. The grounds urged in support of his...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT