Short Summary
Procedural order in a trademark restoration application before the Intellectual Property Rights Division of the Calcutta High Court. The petitioner, Haw Par Corporation Limited, sought restoration of its trademark application IPDATM 252/2023, which had been dismissed for default on 27 November 2024. The court noted that service of the restoration application filed on 5 August 2026 was not yet complete and directed the matter to appear in the monthly list of October 2026.
Detailed Summary
Procedural order in a trademark restoration application before the Intellectual Property Rights Division of the Calcutta High Court. The petitioner, Haw Par Corporation Limited, sought restoration of its trademark application IPDATM 252/2023, which had been dismissed for default on 27 November 2024. The court noted that service of the restoration application filed on 5 August 2026 was not yet complete and directed the matter to appear in the monthly list of October 2026.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Calcutta High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Haw Par Corporation Limited vs Rangoon Chemicals Works Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Kamlesh Kumar MehtavsUnion Of India; Gini Silk Mills Limited
The Rajasthan High Court addressed a writ petition filed by Kamlesh Kumar Mehta seeking the expeditious disposal of his long-pending trademark registration application for 'GILI' in Class 24. After considering the petitioner's request, the court issued an order directing the Registrar of Trade Marks (Respondent No. 1) to decide Application No. 1779181 within a strict period of eight weeks from receiving the certified copy of the judgment.
Ashok Kumar Bhatia Trading As Kanika ImpetusvsKamal Raheja Trading As Amaira Herbals
The Delhi High Court issued an interim stay on a Commercial Court's order that had made an ad-interim injunction absolute. The dispute centered on the alleged infringement and passing off concerning the identical trademark 'MARKS GO' used for skin products by both parties. While noting procedural deficiencies in the lower court's decision regarding passing off principles, the High Court ultimately decided to stay the operation of the restrictive order pending a full appeal hearing.
Pt Tech, LlcvsThe Controller Of Patents, Designs And Trademarks And Anr.
Pt Tech, Llc challenged the actions of The Controller of Patents, Designs and Trademarks in accepting a counter statement beyond the statutory period under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Delhi High Court addressed the petitioner's concerns regarding procedural violations related to evidence filing. Crucially, the court directed that the proceedings concerning opposition application no. 1307531 shall remain suspended until the next hearing date, providing temporary relief to the petitioner.
M.Gagan BothravsThe Central Government
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a Mandamus to direct respondents to act upon a 2013 order from the Central Government regarding R.Anbarasu's misuse of the National Emblem. The court found that despite central government directions, the State Government failed to initiate action against the ex-member of parliament for misusing the emblem on his letter pad.
M/s.Nirmala Transportation and Logistics Pvt. Ltd.vsRegistrar of Trade Marks
The Madras High Court allowed M/s. Nirmala Transportation's appeal against the rejection of its trade mark application under Section 11(1) of the Trade Marks Act. The court found that the initial rejection failed to adequately consider the appellant's arguments regarding the distinct nature of services (goods transport vs. travel arrangements). Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration by the Registrar, contingent upon the appellant providing an undertaking restricting its use to goods transportation.
Facing a trademark dispute?
Arctic's TM litigation team handles ~120 trademark matters per year across India, EU, and UK. From oppositions to infringement actions, we build winning arguments from precedent.
Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.