VIKRAM INDIA LTD. Vs. KILBURN ENGINEERING LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent No. 1 has filed this miscellaneous petition numbered as 21/2008, seeking favourable orders for hearing of this revocation matter at the Circuit Bench at Mumbai instead of Chennai.

(2.) THIS miscellaneous petition was listed and came up before this Appellate Board on 22.07.2008 to decide on the issue of hearing at Circuit bench at Mumbai. We heard Shri A.A. Mohan, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1/petitioner and Shri Debnath Gosh, learned Counsel for the applicant/respondent. The learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submitted that the following are clear and valid reasons as to why this matter should be heard at the circuit bench at Mumbai:

(3.) THE learned Counsel submitted that it is pertinent to note that some other quasi -judicial bodies constituted by Central Government notification which has given power to the respective Chairman on deciding the allocation of business amongst benches has been exercised in the phase of convenience and more accessible with the Region from where the cause of action arose. For example the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 which has parallel legislation with the Patent Act and which has very similar provision about the distribution of business amongst benches under Section 18, read as: