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 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Maxdermcare Skin And Laser Private ... vs Registrar Of Trade Marks on 13 September, 2022

Author: Navin Chawla

Bench: Navin Chawla

                    $~21
                    *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                    +    C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 149/2022 & I.A. 14993/2022, 14994/2022,
                         14995/2022, 14996/2022
                         MAXDERMCARE SKIN AND LASER PRIVATE LIMITED
                                                                       ..... Appellant
                                          Through: Mr.Anshuman      Upadhyay        &
                                                   Mr.Naseem, Advs.

                                              versus

                             REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS
                                                                                ..... Respondent
                                              Through:     Ms.Nidhi Raman, CGSC with
                                                           Mr.Rahul Kumar Sharma, GP &
                                                           Mr.Zubin Singh, Adv.

                             CORAM:
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                                                     ORDER

% 13.09.2022

1. This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 25.06.2020 passed by the Senior Examiner of Trade Marks rejecting the application no. 3640997 of the appellant for seeking registration of its marks.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Impugned Order was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant and that the appellant has already filed an application seeking review of the said order, however, though a hearing thereon was granted by the respondent on 21.06.2022, the same is yet to be decided. The learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice, submits that as the officer concerned was on leave, the review application could not be decided.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Signing Date:15.09.2022 16:42:31

3. In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of directing the respondent to decide on the review application of the appellant, after affording another opportunity of hearing to the appellant, within a period of four weeks from today. Needless to say, in case the appellant is aggrieved of the order passed in the review, it shall always be open to the appellant to challenge the same, including the order impugned herein, in accordance with law.

4. The applications are disposed of as infructuous.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J SEPTEMBER 13, 2022/rv Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Signing Date:15.09.2022 16:42:31