There is a serious dispute on validity of registration of design granted to Plaintiff on 22.04.2016. Defendant, at least prima facie, has been able to rebut presumption of validity of registration.
The term ‘proprietor of a new or original design’ is defined in Section 2(j) of The Designs Act, 2000. Plaintiff, being an importer of products with impugned design from China, cannot claim to be a proprietor of said design. It prima facie stands admitted.
Section 4(b) of The Designs Act, 2000 prohibits registration of a design which, even though for an inadvertent reason, has been disclosed to public anywhere in India by publication in tangible form or by use. By an admitted use since 06.04.2016, said design was prohibited to be granted registration for being prior published.
List on 22.11.2022.
– Hon’ble Justice Navin Chawla of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, GM Modular Pvt. Ltd. v. Syska LED Lights Pvt. Ltd., [CS(COMM) 329/2021] decided on 22.08.2022.
You must be logged in to post a comment.