Adepu Ravinder vs. Adepu Surender
Facts
The petitioner, Adepu Ravinder, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). The IPAB's order, dated April 1, 2012, directed the Registrar of Trademarks to remove or cancel the petitioner's trademark 'ADEPU 222' registered under class 24. The petitioner sought to set aside this order and also filed applications to stay proceedings pursuant to the IPAB's order and to stay a civil suit (O.S. No. 4/2007) pending before the III Addl. Dist. Judge, Karimnagar. The writ petition was filed in the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.
Held
The Court did not decide the merits of the case. The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution, as the petitioner appeared to be not interested in pursuing the matter. Consequently, all pending miscellaneous applications were also closed. The Court made no order as to costs. The primary reason for dismissal was the petitioner's lack of interest in prosecuting the writ petition, as noted by the Court.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) directing the cancellation of the petitioner's trademark is legally sustainable? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought to set aside the IPAB's order. No specific arguments or reliance on any provisions, circulars, or precedents were recorded in the judgment for the petitioner's side regarding the merits of the case. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents, including the IPAB and the Registrar of Trademarks, were represented. No specific arguments or reliance on any provisions, circulars, or precedents were recorded in the judgment for the revenue/state's side regarding the merits of the case.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[ 33e3 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Juri iction) THUR AY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF IUARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT TI{E HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION NO: 17029 OF 2012 Between: Adepu Ravinder, Prop: Adepu Ramaiah Naayana and Co., 8-2-94, Gandhi Nagar, Siricilla, Karimnagar District. (AP) ...PETITIONER AND 1 Adepu Surender, Prop Sunshine Textiles 12-1-9711 , Pragathi Nagar Siricilla, Karimnagar District. (AP)
The lntellectual Property Appellate Board, Reptd.by its Dy-Registrar Guna Complex, Annexe-'l 2nd Floor,443, Anna Salai Teynampet, Chennai The Registrar of Trademarks, Trademarks Registry lP Building, GST Road Guindy, Chennai ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praytng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to lssue a writ or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari setting aside the impugned order bearing No.7812012 passed by the 2nd respondent in ORA/166/2008/TM/CH directing the 3rd respondent to remove/cancel my trademark, ADEP
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.