The Supreme Court recently had the opportunity to adjudicate upon a case related to S.35 of the Trademarks Act. The case was between two separate firms consisting of members from the same family, sharing the same surname – ‘Rakyan’. These firms were each engaged in the business of selling jewellery and precious stones which was also a family business and there were other family firms that were also involved in the same business. The parties’ shops were also “abutting” each

The recent order of the General (CG), Chaitanya Prasad disallowing substantial amendments in trademark applications has created quite the stir! Spadika first blogged on this here, outlining the key aspects of the CG decision. And I followed it up with a short note highlighting what I thought to be a welcome trend in having the executive don a judicial hat more often. I also went on to critique the CG decision for inter-alia being based on flawed assumptions. In particular

Spadika’s well written post exemplifies a good trend in executive decision making.  That even in matters hitherto considered to be within the administrative/executive realm, our patent and trademark office (IPTO) follows a judicial process. In other words, prior to promulgating an executive decision (order), the office hears the parties and renders a speaking (reasoned) order. Of course, this “judicialising” of an executive order came about owing to a suggestion from the Delhi High Court. The IPAA challenged the initial IPTO