Tata Steel Limited v. Union of India & Anr

ORDER %

14.11.2017 Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Id

¶1The learned counsel for the petitioners states that respondent no.2 (Registrar of Trademarks)had m masse declared several applicationsas abandoned. This was plainly contrary to the provisions of the Act. Respondentno.2 has now restoredall ofthe applicationsand same are being dealt with in accordance with law.

¶2In view of the above statement, the learned counsel for the petitioners does not wish to press these petitions.

¶3The petitions and all pending applications are dismissed as ^ withdrawn. %:/.• VIBHUBAKHRU,J NOVEMBER 14,2017 RK

r\' $-23 to 25/^ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3043/2016 and CM No. 12836/2016 TATA STEEL LIMITED Petitioner Through: Mr AchuthanSreekumarandMr Karan, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Respondents Through: MrKirtimanSingh,Mr WaizeAli Noor, Mr Prateek Dhanda and Mr Momin Khan, Advocates. WITH ' + W.P.(C) 3067/2016 and CM Nos. 12987/2016 & 27361/2016 VJ c INTELLECTUAL. PROPERTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION Petitioner Thi-ough: Mr ChanderM. Lall, SeniorAdvocate with Ms Nancy Roy and-Mr Rupin Bahl, Advocates. versus THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS, DESIGNS & TRADE MARKS & ANR Respondents Through: MrManishMohan,CGSC withMs Shivangi Sinha and Ms Manisha , . • Saroha, Advocates for UOI. AND + > W.P.fC^ 3811/2016 JANMAEJAIVADEHRA & ORS Petitioners Through versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Respondents Through: MrJasmeetSingh,CGSC withMr Srivats Kaushal, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HGN'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU