AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Usha, J
Miscellaneous petition filed by the Respondent in the main rectification application for direction regarding the provisions of Section 124 of the Trade
Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
The Petitioner/Respondent is the registered proprietor of the trade mark 'RANATOR' under No. 1005663 in class 19. A civil suit was filed by the
Respondent/applicant for infringement and passing off before the Civil Court and an order of injunction was passed in the said suit. Against the said
order an appeal was preferred and is pending.
In another rectification application under No. ORA/162/07/TM/DEL filed by the Petitioner herein against the said Respondent herein, the
Respondent herein has taken out a miscellaneous petition for dismissal under Section 124 of the Act.
In view of the above it is prayed that both the miscellaneous petitions i.e. in the present ORA/188/07/TM/CH and the Miscellaneous Petition in
ORA/162/07/TM/DEL be heard together as to the applicability of Section 124 of the Act.
The counsel for the Respondent argued orally but did not file any counter to this miscellaneous petition. We heard both the counsel.
The miscellaneous petition has been filed for deciding the issue as to the applicability of Section 124 of the Act and to club the two rectification
applications. We do not find any merit in the application. The Petitioner though has made the application for directions under Section 124 of the Act,
but nothing has been pleaded as to on what grounds the petition has been made. Whereas the prayer is to club the application under Section 124 of the
Act in ORA/188/07/TM/CH and ORA/162/07/TM/DEL, for which again no reasons given as to on what grounds the same is filed.
The Petitioners have also not pleaded as to the present status of the miscellaneous petitions under Section 124 of the Act in ORA/162/07/TM/DEL
whether the Respondent in the miscellaneous petition has filed the reply and whether it is ripe for hearing. In this rectification application we do not
find any separate application, but in the instant petition there is a mention about permission under Section 124 of the Act but not specifically pleaded.
In such circumstances, we are not inclined to club the two miscellaneous petitions. We do not find any merit in the miscellaneous petition which
deserves to be dismissed.
Accordingly the miscellaneous petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.