The Madras High Court had earlier assigned the matter to IPAB to consider it afresh, quashing the tribunal's order which removed the latters' Rally trademark, finding new facts related to the dispute.
IPAB, while reconsidering the matter afresh, on March 23, 2016, directed the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks, Mumabi, seeking certain documents related to the dispute. While the official sent a report with a covering letter in the same month, enclosing certified copies of the documents, the tribunal said there is no signature of any officer in the endorsement.
When the issue came up for hearing, IPAB Chairman Justice K N Basha and Technical Member Sanjeev Kumar Chaswal said the IPAB is constrained to call for further report in respect of the endorsement related to one of the trademarks and the entire original records relating to three trademarks in connection with the dispute.
"It is made clear that the said report and the entire documents shall be reached before the registry of the IPAB bench on or before April 30," said Justice Basha.
The dispute is in connection with the trademarks of Rallifan, and two associate trademarks. Both Rallifan and Mahavir Home Appliances have earlier filed rectification applications with the IPAB to remove the other party's trademarks, according to reports.
Earlier reports suggest that the IPAB, based on these applications, issued an order removing the mark Rally from the registry, which came in favour of Rallifan. Mahavir Home Appliances filed an appeal with the Madras High Court.
The division bench observed that the matter has to be re-examined in the backdrop of the new factual position emerged before the bench, as one of the basis of the order itself was found to be different from what was persuaded by the IPAB. The court ordered the tribunal to consider the matter afresh, based on this finding.
Mahavir Home Appliances alleged that while Rallifan submitted to the IPAB that the associated trademarks of Rallifan were allowed to be lapsed without renewal and it is fighting only for one trademarks of Rallifan, which the tribunal has observed in its order. Meanwhile, the associated marks were renewed till 2002. It argued since there three marks, the company cannot claim rights on one mark alone, it alleged.
Rallifan argued that it has earlier submitted application to cancel the two associated trademarks. It is to clarify these and other details, the tribunal has called for documents from the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks, Mumbai.
