TARLOCHAN SINGH Vs. PRERN FLOUR MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the Respondent No. 1/registered proprietor seeking permission of this Appellate Board to take on record their evidence in support of counter statement. The Rectification Petition was filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and transferred to this Appellate Board pursuant to Section 100 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

(2.) SUBSEQUENT to the transfer of the. matter, it was posted on 26.04.2007 for hearing for the first time. Both tin counsel requested for time to file their affidavit of evidence alongwith documents. This Board was pleased to grant time of 3 months each to file their evidence and directed the Registry of this Appellate Board to post the matter in November, 2007. The matter was taken up in February, 2008 and the applicant had taken out an application to condone the delay in filing the documents and to take the same on record. The said application in M.P. No. 148/2007 was allowed on 15.02.2008 and the evidence was taken on record and directions were given to the Respondent No. 1 to file their evidence within 2 months from the date of receipt of order and reply affidavit, if any, on behalf of the applicant and the documents, if any, be filed within four weeks thereafter.

(3.) THE Learned Counsel for the applicant vehemently opposed the request for extension of time and submitted that no valid reasons were given for the delay. He also pointed out that the doctor's certificate was not filed alongwith the application and is produced only at the time of hearing.