Court :
 Supreme Court of India
Brief :
  According to the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, for getting registration of a trade mark, an application is required to be filed in accordance with the provisions incorporated in the said Act. Such an application is required to be advertised and a detailed procedure is required to be followed before grant of a registration in favour of a claimant. Since a variety of procedural steps are required to be taken like issuing an advertisement, hearing objections, if any filed, it becomes a lengthy procedure and, therefore, time consuming for grant of a registration in matters of trade mark. But once registration is granted in respect of a particular trade mark in terms of the application according to the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, the registration dates and relates back to the date of application. However, the position appears to be different as has been held by this Court so far excise law is concerned. This Court has already held in the aforementioned decision that effect of making the registration certificate applicable from retrospective date under the trade mark law is based on the principle of deemed equivalence to public user of such mark whereas such deeming fiction cannot be extended to the excise law and that the same is only confined to the provisions of the Trade Marks Act. 
Citation :
  CENTRAL EXCISE, BANGALORE Appellant (s) VERSUS M/S. MEYER HEALTH CARE PVT. LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s)
 
			
				Browse CAclubindia ads free. 
Latest updates on WA.
 Daily E-Newsletter and much more.
CCI PRO annual subscription : 
			
          Duration : 1 year  
(Prices Inclusive of GST)
        
 
							
							
							
							  
			 
  
  
  LIVE Course on GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C (Technical | Practical | Concept - Based)
 
                                
                             
  
  