disclaimer

The Bar Council of India regulates the legal practice including law firms in India and this website has been constructed bearing in mind the Rules of the Council. By agreeing to visit the website you hereby acknowledge and accept the following:

  • There has been no advertisement or solicitation, personal communication, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever in any form from us or any of our members to solicit any service through this website.
  • The contents of the website are entirely information based and cannot be relied upon to be legal advice. The firm will not be responsible for any steps taken based on the information available on the website.
  • The website is accessed by you at your own free will and is made available to you at your own request for your understanding and use.
  • Though effort has been taken to keep the website updated by providing all amendments in the law, the firm does not take responsibility for any inaccurate or outdated information or content made available in the website. If the user has any legal issues, he/she must seek independent legal advice.
  • Transmission, receipt or use of this website does not constitute or amount to a lawyer-client relationship.
  • The firm does not warranty the accuracy or authenticity of information available on any third party websites referred to or linked to this website.

Sweet victory for West Bengal – Rectification filed by Odisha against Banglar Rosogolla dismissed

In 2016, the West Bengal government applied for Geographical Indications (GI) tag for the variant called Banglar Rosogolla. The Banglar Rosogolla was granted registration on November 14, 2017. An application for removal/cancellation of the GI Registration obtained for Banglar Rosogolla was filed by one Mr Ramesh Chandra Sahoo in February 2018. Upon service of the rectification application on West Bengal State Food Processing and Horticulture Development Corporation Limited, a counter-statement was filed to defend the registration.

The counter-statement was taken on record by the Geographical Indications Registry and was forwarded to the Applicant for Rectification to file its evidence within 3 months. The Applicant for Rectification, however, failed to file the evidence within the mandatory timeline. Mr Sahoo did file the evidence however the same was after a substantial delay without showing any sufficient cause or providing any explanations as regards the delay. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the Geographical Indication Registry seeking dismissal of the Application for Rectification owing to the delay in filing the evidence. An interlocutory petition was also filed on behalf of West Bengal State Food Processing and Horticulture Development Corporation Limited seeking dismissal of the Application for Rectification.

The Applicant for Rectification sought time to file a reply to such petition at the hearing on September 6, 2019, and the Ld. The registrar was pleased to fix the matter for a hearing on October 21, 2019, to decide upon the interlocutory petition filed by West Bengal State Food Processing and Horticulture Development Corporation Limited.

Pursuant to the hearing, the Ld. The registrar was pleased to dismiss the application for rectification on October 31, 2019, holding that the timelines envisaged by the Geographical Indications Act, 1999 and Rules made thereunder are not extendible in line with the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court as well as the Hon’ble Intellectual Property Appellate Board. The order can be seen here. Click Here 

West Bengal State Food Processing and Horticulture Development Corporation Limited were represented before the Geographical Indications Registry by Mr S. Majumdar along with Mr Manosij Mukherjee of S. Majumdar & Co. along with Mr Sayan Roy Chowdhury, an advocate with the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta. Senior Counsel Mr Ranjan Bachawat of the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta was also briefed and consulted who gave his invaluable inputs in the matter.

blog-author

Manosij Mukherjee

Apart from being an integral part of the litigation team, Mr. Mukherjee deals extensively with trademark oppositions, design cancellations and domain name disputes before the WIPO and the.IN Registry. He also assists Counsels in matters before the various courts and district courts. He is actively involved in proceedings before the IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board). He is a member of INTA.

Saturday, November 2, 2019 | Categories: All, Popular, Litigation, Geographical Indication