9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28.02.1993. Thus the allegation raised in the SCN does not make any sense - also, the department has not produced any evidence to show that the alleged trade mark belongs to Micro Labs. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Astra Pharmaceuticals [1994 (12) TMI 77 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has made a distinction between house mark and product mark(trade name). Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/974/2005 - 41053/2017 - Dated:- 19-6-2017 - Smt. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the appellant Shri M. S. Srinivasan, Adv. for the respondent ORDER Per Bench The respondents are manufacturers of Patent or Proprieta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Counsel, Shri M.S. Srinivasan, reiterated the finding in the impugned order. He submitted that both the authorities have analyzed the issue in the correct perspective. In the SCN, the department has not alleged that the emblem viz., wave lines belongs to Micor Labs. Further, in the instant case, the trade mark of the product is Dolopar , the wave line with inscription ethical is used on all the products of the respondents. The mark is only to identify the manufacturer and not the product itself. The products are sold by the trade name which is Dolopar. The said aspect with regard to house mark and product mark used in patent or proprietary medicines has been explained in the case of M/s. Astra Pharmaceuticals (supra). The abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is used which is invariably a word or a combination of a word and letter or numeral by which the product is identified and asked for. In respect of all products both the product mark and house mark will appear side by side on all the labels, cartons etc. Goods are ordered only by the product mark or brand name. The house mark serves as an emblem of the manufacturer projecting the image of the manufacturer generally. It is also being stressed that the department has not produced any evidence to show that the alleged trade mark belongs to Micro Labs. In the event, we do not find any material to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (Operative part of the order pronounced in the Open Court on 19.06.17) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
