LAWS(CP)-2010-4-9

DALIP KUMAR SOHANLAL MEHESHWARI Vs. NARAYAN ATTURAM CHHAATIJA

Decided On April 23, 2010
Dalip Kumar Sohanlal Meheshwari Appellant
V/S
Narayan Atturam Chhaatija Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957 for rectification of registration number A -73201/2005. The matter was finally listed for hearing at New Delhi on 23rd February, 2010.

(2.) PETITIONER is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of all types of Saunff under a trade mark as 'RADHA'. His application for registration under Trade Mark Act is pending. Respondent No. 1 has obtained impugned copyright registration which is used as tool to harass the applicant by filing opposition to the pending application of the applicant for trade mark. On a search, Petitioner found that there are number of applicants for mark RADHE and the applicant found himself to be prior in preferring application. Registrar of Trade Marks issued wrongly the certificate to the Respondent in face of pending application of the Petitioner. The entry wrongly remains on the register. Registrar of Trade Marks has wrongly issued the certificate.

(3.) RESPONDENT in his written statement has explained that after obtaining trade mark registration for the word label RADHE SHRI in a special style of writing under registration number 1263083 dated 27th January, 2004, he moved his application for copyright registration and got the copyright registration. As such No Objection Certificate issued by the Registrar of Trade Marks was in order. He has been using the said trade mark openly, extensively, continuously uninterruptedly upto the present time. He submits that he is doing extensive business bearing the said trade mark and with the extensive use of that label and the public has come to associate the said trade mark exclusively with the goods of his manufacture. Respondent has denied the allegation of violation in regard to getting the appropriate No Objection Certificate from the Registrar of Trade Marks. Besides, the Respondent has generally denied the allegations of the Petitioner.