• Ready Recknor on filing Trademarks under the new 2017 Rules

    Note prepared by Ms. Mahua Roy Chowdhury, Advocate. She can be contacted at mahua[at]royzz[dot]com. TRADE MARK FILING READY RECKONER – 2017 RULES Trademark Registration is a process that takes around 1-2 years to obtain registration in a case, without any objections or oppositions. However, the time period can be longer if an opposition has been filed by a third party. SEARCH Look for classification of goods and services at the WIPO website (NICE Classification). (Rule 20). In order to avoid a third party opposition, it is pertinent to conduct a ‘public search’ in the online Trade Mark Registry at by providing the trademark name and class to find out if similar marks have already been registered or filed. WHAT CANNOT BE TRADEMARKED Marks which do not have a distinctive character. Marks which are descriptive. Meaning which describe the goods or service in terms of the quality, quantity, shape or geographic indication. Marks that have become customary in the language or region. Well Known marks. Well known marks are marks which a substantial portion of the population relates to particular goods or services and the u ...
  • SEBI Circulars cannot be challenged in SAT: Rules Supreme Court of India

    By Mr. Audip Ghosh, Senior Associate Partner at ROYZZ & CO. He can be contacted at audip[at]royzz[dot]com. Share this: Experts CornerROYZZ & CO. Published on April 7, 2017By Prachi Supreme Court: The Court has ruled that administrative circulars issued by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) cannot be challenged before the Securities and Appellate Tribunal (SAT). The Supreme Court passed this judgment when it was hearing an appeal filed by SEBI against a SAT order in a case relating to National Securities Depository Ltd. (NSDL). Background NDSL and SEBI were at odds over an administrative circular captioned ‘review of dematerialization charges’ issued in 2005, debarring the depository from levying fees/charges on rendering service to the investors who hold Demat accounts with the depository.  The grievance of the appellant (NDSL) was that it is a company and the law permits it to make profits and distribute the dividend to its shareholders. SEBI, without any justification, interfered with its functioning, NSDL had argued. SAT in September 2006 had ruled that the term “order” in SEBI Act is extremely wide, and can be applied in all three types of orders— administrative orders, legislative orders, and quas ...
  • Essar Steel India v. RBI†: A case comment

    By Shriniket Deshpande, Senior Associate, Royzz & Co. Experts CornerROYZZ & CO. Published on September 19, 2017By Saba Introduction Essar Group is an Indian conglomerate into manufacturing, services and retails sectors. The group has operational presence across 29 countries having 45,000 employees across the world.  The Group’s core interest lies in steel and energy sector, Essar Steel being the flagship company of this group. Reserve Bank of India (RBI) vide their press note dated 13-6-2017 had directed banks to initiate insolvency proceedings before National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against 12 companies including Essar Steel India Ltd. (Essar) and accordingly proceedings were initiated by consortium of banks led by State Bank of India (SBI) which is leading the consortium. Background Essar challenged the aforementioned press note by filing a writ petition† before Gujarat High Court Bench at Ahmedabad, citing failure of the consortium of banks to accept the package of debt restructuring, proposed and approved by the Board of Directors of Essar. Essar further challenged authority of RBI to issue directions to NCLT, as interpretation of last line of Par ...

    The Supreme Court verdict dated January 2, 2017 over the misuse of religion, race, caste,  community or language for the  contestants in the election will not only improve the electoral  system of the country but also the  quality of  our political life

    Sanjay Kumar Visen The Supreme Court of India has recently in Abhiram Singh’s Case (2017) dealt with an issue and concern affecting the electoral process and its integrity. The Hon’ble Court has barred the misuse of religion, race, caste, community or language for the contestants in the elections.  It has underlined the gravity of the deeper malaise in the electoral process and has mandated to stem the rot by invoking the available legal remedies. The Constituent Assembly had clear understanding of multi-lingual and religious identities of the people of the country which is very much reflective in the preamble of our Constitution as ‘Sovereign Democratic Republic’. Later on vide the Forty-second Amendment of Our Constitution the ‘Socialist Secular’ words and concepts were given effect to from January 3, 1977 and the Preamble now reads as ‘Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic’. Our Constitution stands for a s ...

    Ultimately, he has been released! But before that the Younger offender, the deadliest among the accused of the Nirbhaya case or call it Delhi Braveheart case had raised the issue of conviction of the Juveniles or child- offenders and their punishment to the higher degree for the serious and heinous offences. The cries of the public, media and specially the petition by the NGOs and Delhi Commission for Women reaching up to the Supreme Court against his release gave renewed impetus to me to go into question “What the Laws is and What the Law ought to be?” on the Juveniles or child-offenders at the time when offences are committed. Understanding in common language in the jurisprudence of constitutional law, Our Constitution through article 20(1) says that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. It is trite law that the sentence impossible on the date of commission of the offence has to determine the sentence impossible on completion of trial. Under article 20(1) of the Constitution of Bharat what is prohibited is the conviction and se ...

    Intro : No absolute right to linguistic minorities to reject a regional language says Honourable Supreme Court.

    The word ‘MINORITY’ has always been the bone of contention whether is the religious or linguistic one, in the past or is the same at present and the tussle between the “majority” and “minority’, now has become a worldwide phenomenon. Be it politically or constitutionally the balancing acts goes on whenever the conflict arises. In Our Country, majorly the political parties have failed by adopting appeasement policy but it is the Hon’ble Supreme Court which has always stood for the same. Here, at present we  are concerned with the rights of linguistic minorities as balanced by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by a decade old and very laudable judgment in the Year, 2004 reported in (2004) 6 SCC 264 titled as “Usha Mehta & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”         Before analysing, further it is pertinent to mention that the word “MINORITY” has not been defined in our Constitution but it’s defined by the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. So, in Indian as well as linguistic context, to understand the term “Linguistic Minority” as defined by the National Commission f ...
  • Enemy Property : Erroneous Claims Denied

    The longstanding proposal to deny the claim for the properties of heirs who migrated to Pakistan and China during Partition is ratified by the Parliament

    Sanjay Kumar Visen The Defence of India Rules, 1962 came into force with effect from November 5, 1962 which provided that the Central Government was authorised to appoint a Custodian of Enemy Property in India to preserve enemy property and these Rules were deemed to be the Rules under the Defence of India Act. The hostilities between India and Pakistan broke out in the year 1965 and thereafter the Enemy Property (Custody and Registration) Order, 1965 was issued by the Government of India. The overall effect of the said Order was that all immovable property in India belonging to or held by or managed on behalf of Pakistani nationals stood vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property in India with immediate effect. Further, the Enemy Property Ordinance, 1968 was promulgated and thereafter it was substituted by the Enemy Property Act, 1968 in July, 1968. The object of the Enemy Property Act was for the administration of the Chinese and Pakistani properties which are already vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India. The management of the said p ...
  • Opinion-Clean Bold on Last Ball

    Recent Supreme Court’s verdict on Srinivasan will certainly prevent the sporting frauds & conflict of interest. Hopefully, the working of BCCI will be more responsive to the expectation of the public at large and to bring in transparency in practices. The very looking to the nomenclature of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), which functions in regulating the game of cricket in India and having major say in today’s International Cricket Council (ICC) gives a feeling that it’s an organisation being governed or patronised by the Government. But alas it’s a private body registered as a society like any NGO under the Societies Registration Act in Tamil Nadu. This myth now exposed and revealed in public domain by Our Hon’able Supreme Court holding that nevertheless it was amenable to writ jurisdiction. This new expansion of concept and dimension of judicial review was in the offing and I had and occasion to see the anguish of the Hon’ble Justice A K Patnaik (then, now retired) while the hearing of the case BCCI Vs Cricket Association of Bihar &Ors, being CA No. 4235 of 2014 was going on. The timely intervention of this cricket lover, who relying on the interest and in-depth knowledge of Justice MukulMudgal (retired Judge, Punjab & Haryana High Court), appointe ...