Kent Cables Private Limited & Ors. vs Kent Ro Systems Limited & Ors. on 30 May, 2023
At the present stage, the argument in favour
of the appellant-defendant that we find holds more water is that in
both Milmet [Milmet Oftho Industries v. Allergan Inc., (2004) 12
SCC 624] and Whirlpool [N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corpn., (1996)
5 SCC 714] , as distinct from the case before us, the prior user of the
successful party predated the date of application for registration of
the competing party. The question to examine, then, would be
whether prior user would have to be anterior to the date of
application or prior to the user by the appellant-defendant. In other
words, the question before the Court would remain whether the
situation on the date of application for registration alone would be
relevant, or whether the developments in the period between this
Signature Not Verified date and the date of grant of registration would have any bearing on
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR CS(COMM) 596/2022 and connected matter Page 36 of 60
Signing Date:31.05.2023
15:13:18
the rights of the parties. All these considerations will be cast into a
curial cauldron to be appreciated by the Court before which the suit
is being contested. In these premises, we cannot conclude that a
prima facie case has not been disclosed by the respondent-plaintiffs.