← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaRA-RF/17/2022dismissed

Shyam Sunder v. Pushpa Devi And Others

2022-07-11Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal4 pages

-1SHYAM SUNDER VS SMT. PUSHPA DEVI AND OTHERS

Present:

Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saksham Mahajan, Advocate for the review applicant-Appellant.

Mr. Amit Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Varun Parkash, Advocate and Mr. Bishan Dass Rana, Advocate for the respondents.

** CM-2134-CI-2022 Allowed as prayed for Annexure RA-1 and RA-2 are taken on record.

This appeal was decided by a detailed judgment passed on 20.04.2022. The application for review of the judgment has been filed on the following three grounds:- i. At page 3 of the judgment, the Court has taken a notice of the invoices from 01.06.2009 to 01.03.2018, whereas, Sh. Lachman Dass died in the year 2007.

ii. This Court has misread the statement of defendant (review applicant) reproduced in the judgment. iii. The trademark registration certificate was never produced on the file, therefore, the Court has wrongly held that it was issued individually in the name of Sh. Lachman Dass.

From the pedigree table drawn on page 1 of the judgment dated 20.04.2022, it is evident that late Sh. Lachman Dass married twice during

-2his lifetime. The name of his first wife was late Smt. Bhagwanti and the appellant is born from their cohabitation. After the death of Smt. Bhagwanti, late Sh. Lachman Dass married Smt. Pushpa Devi. The respondents are the children of Smt. Pushpa Devi and late Sh. Lachman Dass. It is the case of the appellant that late Sh. Lachman Dass, at the first stage, included Sh. Shyam Sunder as partner and thereafter, retired from the partnership in the year 1988. After separating from the partnership, he floated another firm namely M/s Lachman Dass and Company. The invoices referred to at page 3 have been issued by the firm M/s Lachman Dass and Company which is, admittedly, being run by Smt. Pushpa Devi and her children. It is the admitted case of Sh.

Shyam Sunder (the appellant) that after separating from the partnership in the year 1988, late Sh. Lachman Dass continued to market mustard oil. After the death of late Sh. Lachman Dass, Smt. Pushpa Devi and her children have been running the same firm and continue to market mustard oil. In fact, Sh. Shyam Sunder has admitted that Smt. Pushpa Devi is carrying on the business of marketing mustard oil in Gobindgarh Bazar, Hisar, Haryana, under the name of Shehnai brand. With these clarifications, the first objection is clarified. The second ground on which the review has been sought is with regard to misreading of the deposition of Sh. Shyam Sunder which has been extracted at page 3 and 4 of the judgment. On re-reading of the same, this Court does not find any misreading. This Court has drawn an inference from the evidence led itself.

The last objection is with regard to the non-production of the registration certificate. It may be noted here that this Court has only

-3concluded that the registration certificate was issued in the individual name of late Sh. Lachman Dass and not in the name of the firm M/s Lachman Dass Puran Chand. The document produced in evidence is extracted as under:- "Trade Mark Application Number : 264666 Office : DELHI TradeMark NO: 264666 Class : 29 Proprietor Details : Name : LACHAMAN DASS Category : Single Firm Trading As :

Trade Description : MANUFACTURERS.

Proprietor Address: BAZAR GOBIND GARH , HISSAR , HARYANA STATE Address For Service: LACHAMAN DASS, BAZAR GOBIND GARH, HISSAR, HARYANA STATE Nation : India Priority Country: India State : NOT SPECIFIED District : STATE NOT SPECIFIED Priority Details:- Application Date : 27/05/1970 Renewal Date : 27/05/2015 Registration Valid Upto: 27/05/2025 Journal No : 551 - 0 Status: Registered Issued On :

Trade Mark Type : DEVICE / Word Mark : SHEHNAI Class Goods Description 29 EDIBLE OILS.

HISTORY DATA :

LACHAMAN DASS AND BHOJA RAM , TRADING AS LACHMAN DASS PURAN DASS , BAZAR GOBIND GARH , HISSAR , HARYANA STATE ; MANUFACTURERS, EDIBLE OILS.

REGISTRATION RENEWED FOR A PERIOD OF 7 YEARS FROM 27TH MAY, 1977.

REGISTRATION RENEWED FOR A PERIOD OF 7 YEARS FROM 27TH MAY, 1984.

REGISTRATION RENEWED FOR A PERIOD OF 7 YEARS FROM 27TH MAY, 1991.

REGISTRATION RENEWED FOR A PERIOD OF 7 YEARS FROM 27TH MAY, 1998. ADVERTISED IN JOURNAL NO 1171 PURSUANT TO A REQUEST ON FORM TM - 34 DATED 8TH FEBRUARY, 1995,AND ORDER THERE ON DATED 20TH AUGUST , 2001. REGISTERED PROPRIETOR'S BUSINESS ADDRESS IS ALTERED TO : " 43 - NAI ANAJ MANDI , HISSAR - 125001 , HARYANA ."

REGISTRATION RENEWED FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS FROM 27TH MAY , 2005 ADVERTISED IN JOURNAL NO.1330

-4REGISTRATION RENEWED FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS FROM 27/05/2015 ADVERTISED IN JOURNAL NO.1713"

Moreover, the review applicant admits that the trademark was registered in the name of late Sh. Lachman Dass, as an individual and not in the name of the firm.

With these observations, no ground to review is made out. Dismissed.

July 11, 2022 (ANIL KSHETARPAL) Ay JUDGE