At, Intellectual Property Appellate Board
By, HONOURABLE Z.S NEGI CHAIRMAN & HONOURABLE SYED OBAIDUR RAHAMAN TECHNICAL MEMBER
For the Applicant: M.K.Miglani & D.K.Dhingra, Advocates. For the Respondents: R1, K.K.Gautam, Advocate.
(Circuit Bench Sitting at Delhi)
Z. S. Negi, Chairman:
1. Counsel for the applicant along with the applicant in person present. Shri K.K.Gautam authorized representative of counsel for the respondent No.1 present. Authorized representative of counsel for respondent No.1 submits that he has been authorized to make a statement before this Appellate Board to the effect that the impugned trade mark under No.1257906 in class 8 may be cancelled by allowing the rectification application. In view of this statement made by the authorized representative of counsel for the respondent No.1, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that in order to prevent any misuse of the certificate of registration, the same is required to be surrendered by the respondent No.1 to the Registrar of Trade Marks under intimation to the applicant and to this Appellate Board. The submission of the counsel for applicant appears to be fair and logical. Therefore, we are inclined to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
2. In view of the above, the rectification application is allowed and the Registrar of Trade Marks is directed to cancel the trade mark under No.1257906 in class 8 and the respondent No.1 is directed to surrender the certificate of registration to the Registrar of Trade Marks within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, under intimation to the applicant as well as to this Appel
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
late Board. Since the rectification application is allowed, the stay application (M.P. No.96/07) does not survive. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs.