Chennai, Feb 4(PTI) Madras High Court today ordered noticeto Ran India Steels (P) Ltd in Tamil Nadu and IPAB on apetition filed by a Uttar Pradesh based firm against dismissalof its rectification petition seeking removal of similartrademark used by a Tamil Nadu company.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M Y Eqbal andJustice T S Sivagnanam also posted the matter for hearingafter two weeks.
Uttar Pradesh based Rana Steels India Limited filed thepetition challenging Intellactual Appellate Board (IPAB)''sdismissal of its rectification petition seeking removal theregisteration of the identically similar trademark RANATOR byRan India Steels (P) Ltd of Tamil Nadu.Rana Steels India Limited, engaged in the business ofmanufacture and trade of steel bars, steel rolled products,CTD bars, angles and other , round channels,guarders and otherallied goods, also sought the court to call for records ofIPAB and quash its ''impugned'' order dated of October 22 lastyear and cancel registeration granted to the Tamil Nadu firm.
Rana Steels said in order to secure and safeguard itsinterest over its trademark they had obtained registeration ofthe trademark RANA and using it since April one 1993.
The trademark was valid and subsisting till date.
The Uttar Pradesh based firm said they came to know thatRan India Steels (P) Ltd staretd using their trademark RANATORin respect of the same goods against which they filed a civilsuit before the Delhi High Court and secured an order ofinterim injunction on August 14, 2007 restraining therespondent from using the trademark.
However, the petitioner said, Rana Steels India Limitedcame to know that the Tamil Nadu compamy had ''clandestinely''secured registration of their trademark against which theyfiled a rectification petition before IPAB, Chennai.
Rana Steels said in its rectification petition it wassubmittd that the impugned trademark and its registration"RANATOR" was identical and deceptively similar to itstrademark and was in relation to the same/similar goods tothat of the petitioner.
It was pleaded that the impugned registration was contraryto all the provisions and was against the interests of marketand trade, consumers and the Register.
The respondents impugned registration was wrongly remainingin the register was without sufficient cause and liable to berectified.
The petitioner said after final hearing IPAB dismissedtheir the rectification petition.