Find a Lawyer

TRITEX COTTON MILLS LIMITED versus CRESCENT JUTE PRODUCTS LIMITED

Section 10 and 76 Trademarks Rules, 2004, Fourth Schedule, Application for Registration of Class 23 and 24 Trademark Appellant Company, which was preparing and marketing cotton, traded its goods under the fourth class 24 under the name Lotus. Applied for mark registration. Respondents to the Schedule of Trademark Regulations, 2004, filed an objection stating that they had been operating in the name of Mark Lotus since 1990 and had also applied for registration under their Class 23 applicant's seat. The request for was rejected which did not have a valid order to be rejected. The reason for rejecting the applicant's request was because the authority failed to identify any difference between the goods of both the applicant and the respondents as the use of the products described in Schedule 23 and 24 was quite different in that the consumers There are different types. If the applicant's request was granted, it would have confused and confused the businessmen and consumers as it was prevented that the classes of users of the two products in the classes 23 and 24 detailed in classes 23 and 24 were completely different. , Along with the impugned order, the Registrar of Trademarks was instructed to consider the applicant's request for registration of trademark lotuses in accordance with the law. immigration advocates from Mubarik Pur lawyer