INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. versus JUPITER INFOSYS LTD. AND ANR.

INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. versus JUPITER INFOSYS LTD. AND ANR.

IPAB erred in not considering and satisfying itself about the locus standi of the applicant as a 'person aggrieved' for each trademark registration and in light of subsequent events affecting grievance. Applications for rectification/removal must be reconsidered afresh by IPAB, particularly whether the applicant remains a 'person aggrieved' at the time of deciding the application.

Parties
Appellant: Infosys Technologies Ltd.; Respondent: Jupiter Infosys Ltd.; Respondent: Jupiter International Limited
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order of IPAB Removing Registered Trade Mark
Outcome
Appeals partly allowed; impugned order set aside
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Rectification/removal of Trade Mark, Locus Standi, Person Aggrieved, Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, Trade Marks Act, 1999
Intellectual Property Law Trade Marks Rectification/removal of Trade Mark Locus Standi Person Aggrieved Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 Trade Marks Act, 1999

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Infosys Technologies Ltd.

Appellant

Jupiter Infosys Ltd.

Respondent

Jupiter International Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order of IPAB Removing Registered Trade Mark

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is a 'person aggrieved' for applications under Sections 46 and 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 for removal/rectification of a trade mark
  2. 2 Whether the applicant must continue to remain a 'person aggrieved' until the application is finally decided
  3. 3 Whether IPAB must separately consider locus standi in respect of each mark and subsequent events affecting locus

Ratio Decidendi

IPAB erred in not considering and satisfying itself about the locus standi of the applicant as a 'person aggrieved' for each trademark registration and in light of subsequent events affecting grievance. Applications for rectification/removal must be reconsidered afresh by IPAB, particularly whether the applicant remains a 'person aggrieved' at the time of deciding the application.

Court Disposition

Appeals partly allowed; impugned order set aside

Orders

  • Applications for rectification/removal (TRA Nos. 25 to 27 of 2003 / OP Nos. 764 to 766/01) restored to IPAB for hearing and disposal afresh in accordance with law
  • Parties to bear their own costs