Jiva Ayurvedic Pharmacy Limited & Ors vs Jyothy Labs Limited & Anr on 17 March, 2023

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Jiva Ayurvedic Pharmacy Limited & Ors vs Jyothy Labs Limited & Anr on 17 March, 2023

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

                          $~17
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +       C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 114/2023
                                  JIVA AYURVEDIC PHARMACY LIMITED & ORS. ..... Petitioners
                                                     Through:      Ms. Soni Singh, Mr. Abhinav Bhalla,
                                                                   Ms. Parkhi Singh and Mr. Navroop
                                                                   Singh Dhot, Advocates.
                                                     versus

                                  JYOTHY LABS LIMITED & ANR.                              ..... Respondents
                                                     Through:      None.

                                  CORAM:
                                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                                               ORDER

% 17.03.2023 I.A. 5184/2023(u/S 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking exemption from filing certified copies)

1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The Petitioner shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.

3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 114/2023

4. Petitioners are registered proprietors of the various formative variants of "JIVA" marks in multiple classes, as enumerated in paragraph 11 (vii) of the petition, used in respect of various goods and services since 1992. They seek cancellation of Respondent No. 1's registration of the wordmark "JIVA" under application No. 885213 in class 03 w.e.f. 03rd November, 1999.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:24.03.2023 17:52:59

5. Ms. Soni Singh, counsel for Petitioners, submits that registration for impugned mark was obtained on a 'proposed to be used' basis, but there has been no bona fide use of the same in trade or market. To buttress her submissions, she refers to Respondents' press releases and annual reports which do not mention the impugned mark. Thus, she argues that the impugned mark is liable to be cancelled under Section 47 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

6. Issue notice to Respondents, by all permissible modes, upon filing of process fee, returnable on the next date of hearing. Respondents shall file a reply, if any, within a period of 30 days from the date of service.

7. The parties are directed to file their brief note of submissions, not exceeding three pages, along with relevant case law(s), if any, in terms of IPD Rules, at least two weeks before the next date of hearing.

8. List before the Joint Registrar for completion of service and pleadings on 03rd May, 2023 and before Court on 20th July, 2023.

SANJEEV NARULA, J MARCH 17, 2023 d.negi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:24.03.2023 17:52:59

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders