Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Shiv Balak vs The Registrar Of Trade Marks And Others on 11 December, 2023

Author: C.Hari Shankar

Bench: C.Hari Shankar

                             $~32
                             *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                             +         C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 16/2023 and IA 12806/2023
                                       SHIV BALAK                                                    ..... Appellant
                                                                            Through: Mr. Veerendra Kumar Sinha,
                                                                            Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Mr. Nupur Sinha and
                                                                            Ms. Suman Prabhakar, Advs.

                                                                            versus

                                       THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE
                                       MARKS AND OTHERS                    ..... Respondents
                                                    Through: Mr.       Harish      Vaidyanathan
                                                    Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar
                                                    Mishra, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday and
                                                    Mr. Krishnan V., Advs.
                                       CORAM:
                                       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
                                                                            ORDER

% 11.12.2023

1. Mr. Vaidyanathan, learned Counsel for the respondents has raised preliminary objections on the ground of limitation, submitting that the present appeal has been filed almost three years after passing of the impugned order dated 29 June 2020, whereas the statutory period for filing an appeal as envisaged in Section 91(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 is three months. Though the said delay can be condoned under Section 91(2) in the event of sufficient cause, Mr. Vaidyanathan submits that no such sufficient cause is forthcoming in the present case, as the order under challenge, which was passed on a Review Petition filed by the appellant, was sent to the very email ID of the appellant at which the original order, which was subjected to review, was sent.

C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 16/2023 Page 1 of 2

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/12/2023 at 00:07:04

2. If that so, the appellant may have an uphill task insofar as the aspect of delay is concerned.

3. Mr. Vaidyanathan is directed to place on record an affidavit, within a week, the email under which the impugned order dated 29 June 2020 was dispatched to the appellant, with advance copy to learned Counsel for the appellant.

4. Renotify on 5 March 2024.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J DECEMBER 11, 2023 rb Click here to check corrigendum, if any C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 16/2023 Page 2 of 2 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/12/2023 at 00:07:04