PUNJAB TRACTORS LIMITED Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment/order I shall dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 109(2) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act as against the order dated 30.12.1997 passed by the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks. By the aforesaid order the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks dismissed the opposition filed by the petitioner herein and accepted the application of the respondent for registration.

(2.) On 22.6.1979, Shri Pramod Kumar Garg trading as M/s. Prakash Agricultural Industries (India), Agra, U.P. filed an application before the Trade Mark Registry seeking for registration of the trade mark 'SWARAJ' (word per se) in respect of Diesel Oil Engines (not for land vehicles), hand water pumps and parts thereof included in Clause 7 for sale in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar and Haryana. In the said application the respondent claimed die user of the mark applied for since 1.6.1975. The said application was ordered to be advertised as accepted and was accordingly advertised in trade mark journal dated 16.3.1984. Subsequent thereto the petitioner herein gave notice of its intention to oppose the registration of the mark advertised on the ground of its being violative of Sections 11,12 and 18 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act. The aforesaid notice of opposition was contested by the respondent by filing counter statement. The parties thereafter filed their evidence and the matter was set down for hearing and by the order dated 16.9.1993 the said opposition was dismissed and the application for registration was accepted.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the petitioner preferred an appeal against the aforesaid order dated 16.9.1993 in this Court which was registered as C.M. (M) 49/1994. This Court by order dated 27.1.1997 remanded the case back for fresh consideration after affording sufficient opportunity to the parties to lead further evidence in support of their respective cases. Pursuant thereto fresh evidence was filed by the parties and the matter was heard afresh and by the impugned order passed on 30.12.1997 the opposition was again dismissed and the application of the respondent was directed to proceed for registration, as against which the present petition has been preferred.