I Am The Ocean, Llc vs Registrar Of Trade Marks, Trademark ... on 14 June, 2023
11. However, as rightly flagged by the Appellant, the impugned order
does not deal with any of these submissions and merely proceeds on the
ground that the applied trademark is similar to the cited trademark
DESOPILL and the goods in question are also similar. Time and again, this
Court has emphasised that even a quasi-judicial authority must apply its
mind to the submissions made before it and take into consideration all
material brought before it, prior to taking a decision. The importance of
passing a reasoned and speaking order indicating cogent reasons, which
weighed with the authority to come to the decision, needs no reiteration. The
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 14/2025 Page 5 of 7
Signing Date:05.02.2026
16:21:03
Bombay High Court in I Am The Ocean (supra) has observed that albeit
detailed submissions were placed on record by the Petitioner in support of
its plea to register the applied mark but the impugned order makes no
reference to them while holding that the cited marks were identical/similar.
The impugned order also lacked cogent reasons. Significantly, the Court
also noted that in several matters in the past, submissions and documents,
which form part of the replies before the Registrar of Trade Marks, were not
considered. The least expected of an adjudicating officer is to peruse the
reply and extend the bare courtesy of application of mind and not doing so is
complete abdication of quasi-judicial functions vested in the Registrar under
1999 Act and 2017 Rules.