Technical Glass Products vs Ms. Manjusha Bobade
2022 Latest Caselaw 719 Cal/2

OD 22

                               TMA/3/2021
                     IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                              ORIGINAL SIDE


                   TECHNICAL GLASS PRODUCTS, INC
                                VS
              MS. MANJUSHA BOBADE,SENIOR EXAMINER OF
                        TRADE MARK AND ANR.



  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHEKHAR B. SARAF
  Date : 1st March, 2022.
  [Via Video Conference]

                                                                     Appearance:
                                                        Mr. Debnath Ghosh, Adv.
                                                      Mr. Sudhakar Prasad, Adv.
                                                          Mr. Pradipta Bose, Adv.
                                                            Mr. B. Banerjee, Adv.
                                                  Mr. Biswaroop Mukherjee, Adv.
                                                               ...for the appellant

                                               Mr. Rudraman Bhattacharya, Adv.
                                                        Mr. Akash Munshi, Adv.
                                                          ...for the respondents

The Court: This is an appeal filed against an order passed by the

learned Senior Examiner of Trade Marks in relation to an application for

registration of a Trade Mark.

Upon perusal of the order dated December 18, 2020 I am of the view

that the order passed is a speaking order and has not properly dealt with the

grounds raised by the petitioner. Mr. Ghosh relies on the judgment of the

Bombay High Court passed by Justice G.S. Patel in Commercial Appeal (L)

No.18137 of 2021 and Commercial Appeal (L) No.18138 of 2021 (Metso

Outotec Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks) to buttress his arguments.

I do agree that brevity is required, however, complete lack of reasons

upon which the authority has based the order cannot be accepted by this

Court.

In light of the same, the order is quashed and set aside.

I make it clear that all points shall be kept open before the authority.

The authority is directed to grant a fresh hearing to the petitioner and

thereafter pass a reasoned order in terms of Section 18(5) of the Trade Marks

Act, 1999 within a period of eight weeks from date.

Accordingly, TMA/3/2021 is disposed of.

(SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.)

sp/