Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.30 seconds)

X Development Llc vs The Registrar Of Trademarks on 21 June, 2024

9. This Court has already had occasion to consider the validity of orders such as these, which are passed in an unreasoned manner. Mr. Rajasekhar draws my attention to the order dated 6 October 2021 in Metso Outotec Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, the order dated 5 December 2022 in Taramis Labs Pvt. Ltd. v. Registrar of Trade Marks and the order dated 14 June 2023 in I Am The Ocean LLC v. Registrar of Trade Marks. The reasoning in these orders squarely apply here. Suffice to say that the impugned order can, in no view of the matter, be stated to be a reasoned order. The 4/5 ::: Uploaded on - 24/06/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2024 01:23:52 ::: 35-COMMP-1304-2022.doc finding that the subject mark is not being capable of registration should have been supported by cogent reasons rather than a mere reproduction of the section which alleges that the subject mark falls foul of.
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - R I Chagla - Full Document

Mineral Earth Sciences Llc vs X Development Llc on 21 June, 2024

9. This Court has already had occasion to consider the validity of orders such as these, which are passed in an unreasoned manner. Mr. Rajasekhar draws my attention to the order dated 6 October 2021 in Metso Outotec Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, the order dated 5 December 2022 in Taramis Labs Pvt. Ltd. v. Registrar of Trade Marks and the order dated 14 June 2023 in I Am The Ocean LLC v. Registrar of Trade Marks. The reasoning in these orders squarely apply here. Suffice to say that the impugned order can, in no view of the matter, be stated to be a reasoned order. The 4/5 ::: Uploaded on - 24/06/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2024 01:23:56 ::: 35-COMMP-1304-2022.doc finding that the subject mark is not being capable of registration should have been supported by cogent reasons rather than a mere reproduction of the section which alleges that the subject mark falls foul of.
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - R I Chagla - Full Document
1