NIPPON SODA CO. LTD. Vs. V.P. GOYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A. No. 3404/2013 (of plaintiff u/S. 124 of Trademarks Act, 1999)

(2.) The counsel for the defendants in support of the first of the aforesaid contentions has argued that rectification of a trademark can be sought either under Section 47 of the Act or under Section 57 of the Act. He has also invited attention to Section 31, particularly sub-section (2) thereof and contends that the word "invalidity" which has been not defined, has been used in the said provision and that the word "invalidity" in Section 124 has to take colour from Section 9 of the Act i.e. where the registration is sought to be revoked on absolute grounds for refusal as mentioned in Section 9 of the Act.

(3.) On the second contention, though the counsel does not controvert that there is no bar to institution of a suit after filing a rectification application but contends that the "pendency of the proceedings for rectification" referred to in Section 124(1)(i) ought to be only after the defendant in a suit has taken the defence of a registered trademark and cannot be where the plaintiff has already, prior to the institution of the suit, applied for rectification.