Law: Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001)

Section: 114

Law: Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001)

Section: 114

Law: Trade Marks Rules, 2004

Section: 85

(a) Trade Marks Ordinance (XIX of 2001)-------S. 114---Trade Marks Rules, 2004, R.85---Appeal before High Court---Delay, condonation of---Impugned order passed on 29-8-2007, certified copy whereof applied on 25-9-2007, which was prepared and issued on 12-11-2007, whereas appeal was filed on 9-1-2008---Validity---Period of 60 days for filing an appeal, if computed from date of impugned order, then appeal would be barred by 133 days---Period of 48 days consumed in obtaining certified copy of impugned order, if excluded from 133 days, then delay would come to 85 days---High Court had jurisdiction to allow further time after considering merits of case, if there was an application for condonation of delay, but not otherwise---Appellant had not filed application for condonation of delay, thus, no relief could be given to him by way of implied condonation of delay---High Court dismissed appeal for being time barred. National Detergents Limited v. Nirma Chemical Works and another 1992 MLD 2357; 1928 Volume 45 RPC 193; 1928 Volume 45 RPC 421; 1909 Volume 26 RPC 850; Exon Corporation and Esso Inc. v. Syed Nasir Ahmed Jafry and another 1994 SCMR 918; Clifford Chance v. Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks 2009 CLC 339 and Arshad Nasim v. Registrar of Trade Marks and another 1986 CLC 2622 ref. Clifford Chance v. Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks 2009 CLC 339; Arshad Nasim v. Registrar of Trade Marks and another 1986 CLC 2622; Messrs Star Cotton Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd. Karachi v. Collector of Customs, Karachi and another 2010 PTD 1739; Abid v. The State 1998 SCMR 1146; Honda Atlas Cars (Pakistan) Ltd. v. Honda Sarhad (Pvt.) Ltd. and others 2005 SCMR 609 and Miss Rahat Afroze v. State Life Insurance Corporation and others 2008 SCMR 656 rel. (b) Limitation--- ----Appeal on its face being time-barred---Effect---Appellate Court would not be bound to discuss and dilate upon merits of case. ORDER IRFAN SAADAT KHAN, J.---This Miscellaneous Application has been filed under section 114 of the Trademark Ordinance, 2001 (the Ordinance) challenging the order dated 29-8-2007 passed by the Registrar Trademarks (the Registrar) whereby the opposition filed by the appellant was dismissed. 2.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492