INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION Vs. THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS, DESIGNS AND TRADE MARKS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the non-speaking orders passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks while refusing applications for registration of Trade Marks in violation of Section 18(5) of the Trade Marks Act.

(2.) Section 18(5) of the Trade Marks Act mandates the Registrar to record in writing the grounds for refusal or conditional acceptance of the application for registration of Trade Marks. Section 18 of the Trade Marks Act is reproduced hereunder:-

(3.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner urged at the time of the hearing that Section 18(5) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 mandates the Registrar to record in writing the ground for refusal/conditional acceptance and the material used by him in arriving at his decision and the same has to be communicated to the applicant forthwith. It is submitted that Rule 36 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 is violative of Section 18(5) insofar as it provides for sending the copy of the order to the applicant without the grounds for refusal/conditional acceptance. It is submitted that Rule 36 is inconsistent with the mandatory provision of Section 18(5) of the Trade Marks Act and the Registrar of Trade Marks be directed to send the copy of the order containing the grounds of refusal/conditional acceptance to the applicant.