Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.79 seconds)
Documents citing Burger King Corporation vs Ranjan Gupta And Ors. on 24 September, 2018

Steelcase Inc vs Mr. K.J. Bhuta And Anr on 28 May, 2025

18. Once again, this Court reiterates that the pleadings made by the defendant no.1 do not prima facie fall within the ambit of Section 124(1)(b)(ii) of the TM Act. In view thereof, the earlier (abandoned) application for registration of the trademark "STEELCASE" in Class 20 by the plaintiff cannot form the basis of the present application. The same is too I.A. 11463 in CS(COMM) 1180/2018 Page 8 of 11 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BABLOO SHAH Signing Date:28.05.2025 18:49:45 narrow interpretation sought to be given by the defendant no.1. Abandonment of a trademark may be due to various reasons, the report of the Examiner, as in the present case, may be one of them. However, under the present scenario that is not itself sufficient to conclude that the trademark "STEELCASE" in Class 20 by the plaintiff can be called to be 'descriptive' merely because it can be interpreted so. Therefore, this Court is not satisfied that there is/ are any "prima facie tenable" and/ or "plea regarding invalidity" made out by the defendant no.1. This application under Section 124(1)(b)(ii) of the TM Act is but a counterblast, which ought to be nipped at the bud rather than proceeding with frivolous litigations. This Court finds able support in Burger King (supra) wherein a co-ordinate bench of this Court held as under:-
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1