Dolma’s Delicious Victory: Trademark Tussle Settles Momo Monarchy
Summary
The petitioner, Ms. Dolma Tsering, filed a rectification petition seeking the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’. The petitioner claimed ownership of the trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ and alleged that the respondent’s trademark not only infringed upon her prior usage but also utilized her name ‘DOLMA’, confusing. Despite multiple attempts, respondent No.1 did not appear in court, leading to an ex-parte proceeding. The petitioner provided evidence of long-standing use and recognition of her trademark in the market. The court, after reviewing the evidence and submissions, ruled in favour of the petitioner, ordering the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark from the Trade Marks Register.
Background
The petitioner, Ms. Dolma Tsering, owns a business named M/s Dolma Aunty Momos, known for selling Tibetan delicacies since 1994. The petitioner’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ was registered under Class 29, with another application pending under Class 43. The respondent registered a similar trademark, ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’, leading to the petitioner filing a rectification petition before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), which was transferred to the court after the abolition of IPAB.
Issues Raised
The primary issue raised is the alleged infringement of the petitioner’s trademark by the respondent. The petitioner argues that the respondent’s trademark is not only similar but also utilizes her name, confusing the market
Plaintiff's Condition
- Ms. Dolma Tsering emphasized her establishment of the first momo stall under the name ‘Dolma Aunty Momos’ in Lajpat Nagar, Delhi, in 1994. She highlighted her pivotal role in popularizing momos in the region when they were not widely known or accepted. Being originally from Tibet, Ms. Tsering provided context to her entrepreneurial journey, emphasizing the struggles faced by Tibetan refugees in India.
- The petitioner underscored the importance of trademark registration for protecting her brand identity and business interests. She pointed out her trademark registration under the name ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’, emphasizing her exclusive rights over the trademark acquired through legal processes.
- Ms. Tsering presented evidence of her widespread recognition and reputation among consumers, supported by testimonials, media coverage, and the enduring popularity of her momos. She
argued that her brand had become synonymous with quality and authenticity in consumers’ minds. - The petitioner asserted that respondent Mohammed Akram Khan’s use of the trademark ‘Dolma Aunty Momos’ constituted infringement and confusion in the market. She contended that Khan’s adoption of a similar trademark was misleading to consumers and detrimental to her established business.
Defendant's Contention
- Despite being served notice, respondent Mohammed Akram Khan did not appear in court to present any counterarguments or defenses against the petitioner’s claims. This absence led to an
ex-parte proceeding, wherein the defendant’s claims remained uncontested. - Due to the respondent’s non-appearance, there were no specific contentions or arguments put forward to challenge the allegations of trademark infringement and cancellation of registration. The lack of response further weakened the defendant’s position in the legal proceedings.
Court's Reasoning
Considering the petitioner’s evidence of prior usage, reputation, and lack of response from the respondent, the Court accepted the allegations of non-use by the petitioner and ruled in her favour. The court found sufficient grounds for cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark from the Trade Marks Register.
Court's Decision
The court ordered the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ from the Trade Marks Register. The registrar of trademarks was directed to update the register
accordingly within four weeks. The petition was disposed of rendering any pending applications infructuous. The court decision was uploaded on the court’s website
Amul Strikes Back: Court Defends Iconic Trademark Against ‘Amuleti’ Infringement
Changing Trends in Trademark Enforcement Rights
Copyright Infringement – Section 63, A Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence
Draft geographical Indications of Goods(Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023
Dolma’s Delicious Victory: Trademark Tussle Settles Momo Monarchy
Summary
The petitioner, Ms. Dolma Tsering, filed a rectification petition seeking the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’. The petitioner claimed ownership of the trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ and alleged that the respondent’s trademark not only infringed upon her prior usage but also utilized her name ‘DOLMA’, confusing. Despite multiple attempts, respondent No.1 did not appear in court, leading to an ex-parte proceeding. The petitioner provided evidence of long-standing use and recognition of her trademark in the market. The court, after reviewing the evidence and submissions, ruled in favour of the petitioner, ordering the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark from the Trade Marks Register.
Background
The petitioner, Ms. Dolma Tsering, owns a business named M/s Dolma Aunty Momos, known for selling Tibetan delicacies since 1994. The petitioner’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ was registered under Class 29, with another application pending under Class 43. The respondent registered a similar trademark, ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’, leading to the petitioner filing a rectification petition before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), which was transferred to the court after the abolition of IPAB.
Issues Raised
The primary issue raised is the alleged infringement of the petitioner’s trademark by the respondent. The petitioner argues that the respondent’s trademark is not only similar but also utilizes her name, confusing the market
Plaintiff's Condition
- Ms. Dolma Tsering emphasized her establishment of the first momo stall under the name ‘Dolma Aunty Momos’ in Lajpat Nagar, Delhi, in 1994. She highlighted her pivotal role in popularizing momos in the region when they were not widely known or accepted. Being originally from Tibet, Ms. Tsering provided context to her entrepreneurial journey, emphasizing the struggles faced by Tibetan refugees in India.
- The petitioner underscored the importance of trademark registration for protecting her brand identity and business interests. She pointed out her trademark registration under the name ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’, emphasizing her exclusive rights over the trademark acquired through legal processes.
- Ms. Tsering presented evidence of her widespread recognition and reputation among consumers, supported by testimonials, media coverage, and the enduring popularity of her momos. She
argued that her brand had become synonymous with quality and authenticity in consumers’ minds. - The petitioner asserted that respondent Mohammed Akram Khan’s use of the trademark ‘Dolma Aunty Momos’ constituted infringement and confusion in the market. She contended that Khan’s adoption of a similar trademark was misleading to consumers and detrimental to her established business.
Defendant's Contention
- Despite being served notice, respondent Mohammed Akram Khan did not appear in court to present any counterarguments or defenses against the petitioner’s claims. This absence led to an
ex-parte proceeding, wherein the defendant’s claims remained uncontested. - Due to the respondent’s non-appearance, there were no specific contentions or arguments put forward to challenge the allegations of trademark infringement and cancellation of registration. The lack of response further weakened the defendant’s position in the legal proceedings.
Court's Reasoning
Considering the petitioner’s evidence of prior usage, reputation, and lack of response from the respondent, the Court accepted the allegations of non-use by the petitioner and ruled in her favour. The court found sufficient grounds for cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark from the Trade Marks Register.
Court's Decision
The court ordered the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ from the Trade Marks Register. The registrar of trademarks was directed to update the register
accordingly within four weeks. The petition was disposed of rendering any pending applications infructuous. The court decision was uploaded on the court’s website
Amul Strikes Back: Court Defends Iconic Trademark Against ‘Amuleti’ Infringement
Changing Trends in Trademark Enforcement Rights
Copyright Infringement – Section 63, A Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence
Draft geographical Indications of Goods(Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023
Dolma’s Delicious Victory: Trademark Tussle Settles Momo Monarchy
Summary
The petitioner, Ms. Dolma Tsering, filed a rectification petition seeking the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’. The petitioner claimed ownership of the trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ and alleged that the respondent’s trademark not only infringed upon her prior usage but also utilized her name ‘DOLMA’, confusing. Despite multiple attempts, respondent No.1 did not appear in court, leading to an ex-parte proceeding. The petitioner provided evidence of long-standing use and recognition of her trademark in the market. The court, after reviewing the evidence and submissions, ruled in favour of the petitioner, ordering the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark from the Trade Marks Register.
Background
The petitioner, Ms. Dolma Tsering, owns a business named M/s Dolma Aunty Momos, known for selling Tibetan delicacies since 1994. The petitioner’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ was registered under Class 29, with another application pending under Class 43. The respondent registered a similar trademark, ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’, leading to the petitioner filing a rectification petition before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), which was transferred to the court after the abolition of IPAB.
Issues Raised
The primary issue raised is the alleged infringement of the petitioner’s trademark by the respondent. The petitioner argues that the respondent’s trademark is not only similar but also utilizes her name, confusing the market
Plaintiff's Condition
- Ms. Dolma Tsering emphasized her establishment of the first momo stall under the name ‘Dolma Aunty Momos’ in Lajpat Nagar, Delhi, in 1994. She highlighted her pivotal role in popularizing momos in the region when they were not widely known or accepted. Being originally from Tibet, Ms. Tsering provided context to her entrepreneurial journey, emphasizing the struggles faced by Tibetan refugees in India.
- The petitioner underscored the importance of trademark registration for protecting her brand identity and business interests. She pointed out her trademark registration under the name ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’, emphasizing her exclusive rights over the trademark acquired through legal processes.
- Ms. Tsering presented evidence of her widespread recognition and reputation among consumers, supported by testimonials, media coverage, and the enduring popularity of her momos. She
argued that her brand had become synonymous with quality and authenticity in consumers’ minds. - The petitioner asserted that respondent Mohammed Akram Khan’s use of the trademark ‘Dolma Aunty Momos’ constituted infringement and confusion in the market. She contended that Khan’s adoption of a similar trademark was misleading to consumers and detrimental to her established business.
Defendant's Contention
- Despite being served notice, respondent Mohammed Akram Khan did not appear in court to present any counterarguments or defenses against the petitioner’s claims. This absence led to an
ex-parte proceeding, wherein the defendant’s claims remained uncontested. - Due to the respondent’s non-appearance, there were no specific contentions or arguments put forward to challenge the allegations of trademark infringement and cancellation of registration. The lack of response further weakened the defendant’s position in the legal proceedings.
Court's Reasoning
Considering the petitioner’s evidence of prior usage, reputation, and lack of response from the respondent, the Court accepted the allegations of non-use by the petitioner and ruled in her favour. The court found sufficient grounds for cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark from the Trade Marks Register.
Court's Decision
The court ordered the cancellation and removal of respondent No.1’s trademark ‘DOLMA AUNTY MOMOS’ from the Trade Marks Register. The registrar of trademarks was directed to update the register
accordingly within four weeks. The petition was disposed of rendering any pending applications infructuous. The court decision was uploaded on the court’s website
Amul Strikes Back: Court Defends Iconic Trademark Against ‘Amuleti’ Infringement
Changing Trends in Trademark Enforcement Rights
Copyright Infringement – Section 63, A Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence
Draft geographical Indications of Goods(Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023
Connect with our Experts to resolve your legal issues!
KAnalysis is a boutique full service law firm, well positioned to represent its international and domestic clients.
© 2007 – 2024 KAnalysis Consultant Private Limited. All Rights Reserved