{"id":6213,"date":"2015-03-18T17:03:00","date_gmt":"2015-03-18T17:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/sccblog\/?p=6213"},"modified":"2015-10-14T13:32:32","modified_gmt":"2015-10-14T08:02:32","slug":"sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional"},"content":{"rendered":"<p   ><b>Madras High Court: <\/b>In a petition filed for the scrutiny of Section 85 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 dealing with the qualification and selection of the Chairman and Judicial Member of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) as violative of the Basic Structure of the Constitution insofar as it is related to the establishment of the IPAB, the Division Bench of S.K. Kaul, C.J. and M.M. Sundresh, J., declared Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999, which deals with qualification for a member of Indian Legal Service who held the post of Grade I of service or of higher post at least 5 years to the post of Vice-Chairman and eligibility of a member of the Indian Legal Service who has held the post of Grade I of that Service for at least 3 years for appointment to the post of a Judicial Member in IPAB, as unconstitutional for offending the principles of separation of power and independence of judiciary and being contrary to the Basic Structure of the Constitution.<\/p>\n<p   >The issue raised before the Court was that Section 85 of the Trade Marks Act infringes the doctrine of separation of powers and the independence of judiciary as an individual who is not a practicing lawyer is appointed as a technical member and thereafter as Vice-chairman and Chairman; similarly there is a discrepancy between the qualifications of a Registrar under Trade Marks Act and Controller under the Patent Act. The entire administration of the IPAB is controlled by Government and not left to the Chairman. As argued by noted counsel, Arvind Datar on behalf of the petitioner, the scheme governing Section 85 demonstrates executive encroachment within the judicial sphere. On the contrary the Additional Solicitor General G.Rajagopal for the respondents, sought to refute the contentions.<\/p>\n<p   >Perusing the contentions, the Court observed that the Supreme Court had clearly stated that Tribunals should be established with similar characteristics and standards of the Court which is to be substituted, thereby protecting Judiciary from the Executive. The Court was of the opinion that the guidelines by the Supreme Court are binding in nature. The Court further observed that the respondents overlooked the directives laid down in <i>Union of India<\/i> v. <i>R.Gandhi<\/i>, (2010) 11 SCC 1, as the selection process for the IPAB is entirely in the hands of the Executive, even though the functions of the IPAB are judicial in nature, thus contravening the Basic Structure of the Constitution. The Court therefore declared the constitution of the Appointment Committee as contrary to the basic structure of the Constitution and directed a re-constitution of the Committee by providing a predominant role in the selection process to the Judiciary. &nbsp;<font size=\"1\"><i>Shamnad Basheer<\/i> v. <st1:place w:st=\"on\"><i>Union<\/i><\/st1:place><i> of <st1:country-region w:st=\"on\"><st1:place w:st=\"on\">India<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region>,&nbsp;<\/i><\/font><span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2015_SCC_OnLine_Mad_299 \">2015 SCC OnLine Mad 299<\/a>,&nbsp;<\/span><font size=\"1\">decided on 10.03.2015<\/font><span><\/span><\/p>\n<p   ><o:p><\/o:p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court: In a petition filed for the scrutiny of Section 85 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 dealing with the qualification <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":7321,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6213","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-intellectual_property"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Madras High Court: In a petition filed for the scrutiny of Section 85 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 dealing with the qualification\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-03-18T17:03:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-14T08:02:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/\",\"name\":\"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-03-18T17:03:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-14T08:02:32+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional","og_description":"Madras High Court: In a petition filed for the scrutiny of Section 85 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 dealing with the qualification","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2015-03-18T17:03:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-14T08:02:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/","name":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","datePublished":"2015-03-18T17:03:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-14T08:02:32+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional-2\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":6570,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/18\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional\/","url_meta":{"origin":6213,"position":0},"title":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional","author":"Sucheta","date":"March 18, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: In a petition filed for the scrutiny of Section 85 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 dealing with the qualification and selection of the Chairman and Judicial Member of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) as violative of the Basic Structure of the Constitution insofar as it is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;High Courts&quot;","block_context":{"text":"High Courts","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/highcourts\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6546,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/25\/sections-85-2-b-and-85-3-a-of-trade-marks-act-1999-declared-unconstitutional1\/","url_meta":{"origin":6213,"position":1},"title":"Sections 85 (2) (b) and 85 (3) (a) of Trade Marks Act, 1999 declared unconstitutional","author":"Sucheta","date":"March 25, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: In a petition filed for the scrutiny of Section 85 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 dealing with the qualification and selection of the Chairman and Judicial Member of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) as violative of the Basic Structure of the Constitution insofar as it is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;High Courts&quot;","block_context":{"text":"High Courts","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/highcourts\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":244252,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/23\/technical-members-of-ipab-are-legally-trained-and-qualified-supreme-court-says-the-board-can-function-without-a-judicial-member\/","url_meta":{"origin":6213,"position":2},"title":"\u201cTechnical members of IPAB are legally trained and qualified\u201d; Supreme Court says the Board can function without a judicial member","author":"Editor","date":"February 23, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThese members had practical legal experience of ten to fifteen years. The fact that they were appointed as technical members cannot obfuscate the fact that they are legally trained and qualified.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240203,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/05\/can-a-generic-expression-be-granted-registration-and-or-protection-as-a-trade-mark-under-trade-mark-laws-ipab-explains-if-n-95-is-capable-of-being-registered-or-protected-as-a-trade-mark\/","url_meta":{"origin":6213,"position":3},"title":"Can a generic expression be granted registration and\/or protection as a trade mark under trade mark laws? IPAB explains if &#8220;N 95&#8221; is capable of being registered or protected as a trade mark","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 5, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB): The Bench of Justice Manmohan Singh (Chairman) and Lakshmidevi Somanath (Technical Member, Trademarks) and Makyam Vijay Kumar (Technical Member, Trademarks), barred the registration of \"N 95\" as a trade mark under Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act,1999. The rectification application was filed under Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/IPAB.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/IPAB.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/IPAB.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/IPAB.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/IPAB.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":286510,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/07\/bombay-high-court-upholds-intellectual-property-appellate-board-decision-to-delete-oflomac-medicinal-product-as-slightest-confusion-in-pharmaceutical-products-may-cause-disastrous-effect-on-public-leg\/","url_meta":{"origin":6213,"position":4},"title":"Bombay High Court: Mere existence of the slightest probability of confusion in case of medicinal product marks requires that the use of such mark be restrained","author":"Arunima","date":"March 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court observed that confusion in the case a medicinal or pharmaceutical product may have disastrous effect on the health.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":246590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/06\/tribunals-reforms-rationalisation-and-conditions-of-service-ordinance-2021\/","url_meta":{"origin":6213,"position":5},"title":"Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"April 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"On April 4, 2021, the President has promulgated the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 effective immediately. The Ordinance seeks to dissolve several appellate bodies and transfer their functions to judicial bodies. These acts include, the Cinematograph Act, 1952, the Customs Act, 1962, the Airports Authority of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legislation Updates&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-53.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-53.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-53.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-53.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-53.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6213","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6213"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6213\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7321"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6213"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6213"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6213"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}