Sanjay Sitaram Khemka vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 5 May, 2006
In such notice
dated 24th
February, 2010, specific direction has been issued to petitioner
that counter statement has been filed by respondent no.5 and invited
attention of petitioner to rule 50 of Trade Marks Rules, 2002 and no
evidence in support of such opposition has been filed by petitioner
and, then, Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks is left with no
alternative but to consider rule 50 sub rule (2) of Trade Marks
Rules, 2002. This crucial notice dated 24th
February, 2010 has been sent to petitioner to his
correct official address. For that, no document has been produced on
record by petitioner that such notice has not been received by
petitioner because envelope has not been produced on record.
Therefore, this being disputed question of fact between the parties,
in such circumstances, this court cannot entertain petition to
decide disputed question of fact as per decision of Hon'ble apex
court in case of SANJAY
SITARAM KHEMKA V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.,AIR 2006 SC 2016.
Relevant
discussion made in para 9 and 10 of said judgment is quoted as
under: