A bench of Justice Manish Pitale said on June 1, that a two -way trading of Yamah’s WR and Honda’s WR -V may be confused, but before refusing Yamaha’s application, the authority should be considered exceptional and issued the advertisement.
The company has been using the WR trademark internationally since 1990 1990, refusing to the application, the authority said in its “secret” order to Yamaha’s international prestigious claims.
Justice Piete said that the authority would have crossed the “detailed and well -known command”.
Yamah Hattudki Kabuki Kaisha was shifted to the High Court and challenged the order made by the examiners of the Registrar/Trade Marx of May and refused to register the trademark ‘WR’.
During Yamaha’s trademark, the authority said that people were likely to be confused, for which registration was sought and there is already a similar trademark on the register. Registrar mentioned the trademark of Honda Motor Company Limited – WR -V. Yamah and Honda’s ‘WR -V’ – Yamaha’s opinion was unlikely to be confused in the minds of people.
It should be noted that the quoted Mark WR-D is registered in 12 in the same class, which includes motorcycles, the court said.
“Therefore, appealing to Section 2 (1) of the Trade Marx Act, it is stated that the defendant (the examiner of the registrar/trade marks) cannot be misinterpreted.”
Justice Piete said that Yamah has failed to show how this department belongs to the particular trademark in the minds of the people.
The court noted that Yamah’s differences have been using the WR trademark internationally since 1990, 1990, 1990.
“This may be the situation in favor of the petitioner (Yamah),” he said.
Justice Piete said that it is not an unknown event that the same or similar trademarks may exist on the register.
The court canceled the order approved by the Registrar of the Registrar/Trade Marx Examination, which refuses to apply for the WR trademark.
As per the provisions of the Trade Marx Act, the authority directed the authority to advertise the petitioner’s application before acceptance and then proceed with the law.
Under section 4 (1) of the Trade Marx Act, the authority can promote the objectionable application before accepting the application.
The registrar opposed Yamah’s petition in court and again told him that his trademark WR was not different from WR V-V and therefore there was a possibility of confusion in people’s minds.
Yamahha claimed from his petition that his trademark ‘WR’ was in respect of his motorcycle, and Honda Motor Company Limited’s trademark WRV was in the context of his car.
It states that the two exist at the same time on various international workplaces.
In August 1990 1990, he accepted the trademark ‘WR’ for two -wheelers and three -wheeled products, parts and equipment, the company has pointed out that they have sold these products in 1999 1999.
The company had planned to start its WR range motorcycles in India and so in 2018, the trademark WR registered in 2018.
He submitted to the court that the registrar rejected his application mechanically without properly implementing his application.
.
