ORA/43/2008/TM/DEL. Case: Sona Business Private Limited Vs S.C. Chouhan and Ors.. Intellectual Propery Appellate Board Cases

Case NumberORA/43/2008/TM/DEL
CounselFor Appellant: M.K. Miglani
JudgesK.N. Basha, J. (Chairman) and Sanjeev Kumar Chaswal, Member (T)
IssueIntellectual Property Rights
Judgement DateFebruary 19, 2015
CourtIntellectual Propery Appellate Board Cases


K.N. Basha, J. (Chairman), (Circuit Sitting At Delhi)

  1. This application is filed for the removal of impugned trade mark SONA under registration No. 1197956 in Class 06 in the name of Shri S.C. Chouhan, trading as Shiv Enterprises.

  2. Mr. M.K. Miglani, the learned counsel is appearing for the applicant. The respondent neither appears in person nor through any advocate today. It is seen that even for the last date of hearing the respondent was called absent as he was not appearing or represented by any counsel. The online verification revealed that notice was served on the earlier occasion to the respondent. It is pertinent to note even for the today's hearing, the notice was already served on the respondent as per verification of the records of the registry. However, the respondent has not chosen to appear either in person or through any advocate even today.

  3. Mr. M.K. Miglani, the learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has already filed a civil suit No. 51/2007 on the file of Additional District Judge, Delhi and in that consent decree was passed on the basis of the undertaking given by the respondents herein who are the defendants in the suit to the effect that the undertake that they will not use the impugned trade mark "SONA" for any manufacturing products in respect of the goods manufactured and used by the applicant herein.

  4. It is contended that subsequently the respondents in violation of their undertaking started using the impugned trade mark name and it is defendant by them saying that they are not related to the goods of the applicant and on the other hand they are using the same for industrial purpose. The learned counsel would submit that thereafter, the applicant preferred present application for rectification of the impugned trade mark against the respondent and also filed the execution petition for the execution of the consent decree passed by the Civil Court.

  5. The learned counsel would pointed out that even in the execution petition in EP No. 182 of 2010 in Suit No. 51 of 2007 filed before the Additional District Judge, Delhi. The respondent No. 1 herein filed the counter affidavit namely M/s. Shiv Enterprises represented by Shree Chand Chouhan, son of Late Sh. Megh Raj Chouhan specifically stating that they are not using the impugned trade mark for any purpose and also given the paper publication to that effect in Para 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit. The learned counsel would also...

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