PATENT AND DESIGNS ACT, 1911, CASES

Section-51A(1)(a)When a design is
registered prima facie it is presumed to be new and original. But entry in the register is not conclusive thereof and the presumption is rebuttable one. We have examined the sample, compared them and looked at their design as a whole and found that the design of the respondent is nothing but an imitation of the petitioner’s design. So, the design of respondent No.l is not a new or original one.  The respondent’s design is therefore, liable to be called on all the grounds stated in Section 51A(1)(a) of the Act.

Mr. Yar Mohammad Vs. Mr. Satadal Dhali 9 BLT (HCD)-31.

Section-51A

Has no locus standi-in the instant case the petitioner has utterly failed to show how he is an interested person in respect of a design relating to cycle and rickshaw parts inasmuch as he has failed to bring home his claim that he is a dealer of those parts or that at any point of time he manufactured them. In that view of the matter it appears that he has failed to fulfil the condition precedent for filing an application under section 51 of the Act. Moreover, on a perusal of the materials on record it appears that it has been finally established that the registered design bearing No.01010, dated 12.8.92 is a new and original one-application is rejected.

Md. Shahidullah Vs. Year Mohammad. 9BLT(HCD)-132.

Section-51A(1)

It appears that the design of the respondent No.1 substantially resembles with the design of the petitioner, which is apparent in the neck eye. Therefore, it appears thatthe respondent No.1 by suppressing the fact that a similar design had alreadybeen registered as back as in 1994 obtained the registration of their design bycommitting a fraud upon the Controller of Designs. It further appears that therespondent No.2 also failed to discharge – the legal duties cast upon him andafter proper scrutiny failed to discover the fact that the design applied foralready registered.Thus, the registration given by the respondent No.2 in favourof the respondent No. 1 being registration No.01638 dated 14.5.96 in class-1 isneither a new nor an original design and it has previously been published inBangladesh and also registered by the petitioner in 1994. Thus the registereddesign No.01638 dated 14.5.96 is class-1 is liable to be cancelled.

Golam Rabbani Chowdhury Vs. Md. Izzat Ali Khan & Anr. 9BLT(HCD)-170.

 

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.