← Library
High Court of DelhiW.C.(C)-IPD/11/2024

Mittal Electronic Industries v. The Registrar Of Trade Marks

2024-07-11Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee4 pages

$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)-IPD 11/2024, CM 35/2024-Exp MITTAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Siddharth Yadav and Mr.

Nageshwar Kumar, Advs.

versus THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE % 11.07.2024

O R D E R

1.

Vide the present petition the petitioner, the registered proprietor of the trade mark 'MILTON', seeks the following reliefs:- "a. Issue a Writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s) in the nature of Mandamus and/or any similar Writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s) directing Respondent to restore/reinstate the Petitioner's Registered Proprietor Name to MITTAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES in the Registered Trade Marks Application of MILTON bearing its Trade Marks Application No. 419520 in Class 9 of The Trade Marks Act, 1999; b. Issue a Writ, Order, or Direction of Mandamus directing Respondent to change the Petitioner's Firm Address to 1701, Bhagirath Palace, Delhi-110006 in respect of allowed Request on TM-34 dated 22nd July 2002 in the Registered Trade Marks Application of MILTON bearing its Trade Marks Application No. 419520 in Class 9; c.

Issue a Writ, Order, or Direction of Certiorari instructing the Respondent to quash, set aside any order or direction if made, that unilaterally changed the Registered Proprietor Name from MITTAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES to INDIAN AGENCIES in the Registered Trade Marks Application for MILTON under Trade Marks Application The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

No. 419520 in Class 9;

d. Such other Writ, Order, or Direction in favour of the Petitioner as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2.

Succinctly put, the petitioner herein adopted the mark 'MILTON' in the year 1982 and is the registered user of the said mark. On 22.03.1984, one MITTAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES, a partnership firm, as a proprietor filed an application no. 419520 in Class 9 seeking registration of the mark 'MILTON'. Subsequently, the said partnership firm was dissolved vide a Deed of Dissolution dated 31.03.1992 and converted into a proprietorship concern. It was then that the present petitioner took over the role of the proprietor of the newly formed MITTAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES and the rights which were initially vested in the former partnership firm were transferred to the said new proprietorship firm and the trade mark 'MILTON' in class 9 was registered in the name of the petitioner on 30.01.1991 when it was issued the Trade Marks Certificate bearing its certificate no. 173423.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter a request on FORM TM-34 was made by the petitioner on 22.07.2002 before the Trade Marks Registry for the change of address from 1681/16, Jogdhian Colony, Bhagirath Palace, Delhi-110 006 to 1701, Bhagirath Palace, Delhi-110 006. He further submits that though the said request was duly approved by the Trade Marks Registry, however, for reasons best known was not updated by the said Trade Marks Registry. 4.

It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent instead erroneously altered the name of the registered proprietor without any prior The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

notification to the petitioner. As a result whereof, the petitioner remained uninformed about this change. In fact, it was only by way of a RTI application dated 25.10.2023 when the petitioner sought information regarding alteration in address and name that the petitioner was informed a vide a response dated 28.11.2023 by the respondent that no request, application or document had been submitted to effect the change of the name of the registered proprietor. Subsequently, though the petitioner then submitted a letter to the Post Registration Section on 28.12.2023 as well, however, despite the submission thereof, the respondent never took any action thereon.

5.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent in response submits that the above was only due to an inadvertent error, which has since been rectified as both the address has already been changed as 1701, Bhagirath Palace, Delhi-110 006 and the name of the registered proprietor is also now reflecting as MITTAL ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES after restoration. The aforesaid details are reflecting on the official website of the Trade Mark Registry, as is apparent from what was handed over in Court during the course of hearing. The same is reproduced hereinbelow: The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

6.

In view of the fact that the registration has now been restored in the name of the petitioner, nothing survives in the present petition and the same alongwith the pending application, if any, is accordingly disposed in the aforesaid terms.

SAURABH BANERJEE, J JULY 11, 2024/rr The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.