Ashwa Ghosh v. Vizrt AG

Delhi High Court · 19 Jul 2023 · 2023:DHC:5027
C. Hari Shankar
FAO-IPD 5/2023
2023:DHC:5027
intellectual_property appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

An appeal under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 is not maintainable against decisions of the WIPO administrative panel as it is not an order passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks.

Full Text
Translation output
FAO-IPD 5/2023 HIGH COURT OF DELHI FAO-IPD 5/2023 & CM 84/2023, CM 85/2023
ASHWA GHOSH ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Naipal Singh, Adv.
VERSUS
VIZRT AG AND OTHERS ..... Respondents
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal preferred under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 against an administrative panel decision of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). O R D E R (ORAL) % 19.07.2023

2. It is quite obvious that the appeal does not lie. Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act provides for appeal against orders passed by the Section 2(y) as the Registrar of Trade Marks as referred to in Section

3. Section 3 envisages appointment of specific officer by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette as the Controller- General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, who shall be the

3. The impugned order is not passed by the Registrar of Trade FAO-IPD 5/2023 Marks. Nor is the Administrative Panel of the WIPO the Registrar, for the purposes of Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act.

4. The appeal is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed in limine.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.