M/S. PANACEA BIOTEC LTD. Vs. M/S. NEON LABORATORIES PVT. LTD.
LAWS(IP)-2013-10-19
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY APPELLATE BOARD
Decided on October 07,2013

M/S. Panacea Biotec Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
M/S. Neon Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.N.BASHA,CHAIRMAN - (1.) THE applicant has come forward with the application seeking the relief of rectification by removing / expunging the Trade Mark No. 601815 in class 5.
(2.) THE case of the applicant is that they have registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having their Head Office at New Delhi. They have adopted the trade mark CILLAMIN in the year 1989 and they were using the said mark from 1994 onwards. Their mark was so familiar among the customers by their continuous use.
(3.) THE respondent preferred an application on 16/07/1993 for registration of the mark CILLAMIN stating that they have proposed to use the said trade mark. It is also stated by the applicant that till date the respondents have not chosen to use the said trade mark even after its registration. Therefore, it is stated that the said trade mark is wrongly registered by the Registrar and the same is liable to be removed. The respondents filed counter statement stating that they are the leading manufacturers in medical and pharmaceutical preparation. They have filed an application on 16/07/1993 for registration of trade mark CILLAMIN in class 5 in respect of pharmaceutical preparations. The respondents further stated that they have adopted this trade mark without any reference and knowledge of any other trade mark of the same name. It is also stated the said word CILLAMIN was coined from the generic name Penicillamine. The respondent stated that the application for rectification was not made by the aggrieved person. The respondent denied the other allegations made by the applicant. The applicant is represented by Ms. Monika Razdan, Deputy Manager (IPR) as authorized by the applicant company as per the resolution dated 26/09/2013. The party in person would submit that the applicant has produced sufficient evidence to establish their claim that they are the prior user of the trade mark CILLAMIN. It is contended that the said evidence is put in the form of Drug Licence, Manufacturing License, WHO Certificate copies, Sales Invoices, promotion materials etc. It is contended that the original Drug licence was obtained in the name of M/s. PANACEA DRUGS PRIVATE LIMITED and subsequently the name was changed to the present name M/s. PANACEA BIOTEC LIMITED. The party in person also relied on the invoices for the year 1993 and 1994 in order to show that they are prior use?of the trade mark CILLAMIN. The party in person would also contend that till date the respondents were not using the trade mark CILAMIN and as such the Registrar has wrongly registered the trade mark on the basis of the application preferred by the respondent and the same is liable to be removed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.