https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191254 In rectification proceedings for removal of a trade mark under Sections 46 and 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, the applicant must remain a "person aggrieved" until final decision, and that grievance must still subsist when removal is ordered. The SC held that the concept of "person aggrieved" has different implications under Sections 46 and 56, and that a lapse in the applicant's live grievance defeats justification for rectification. It further held that transfer of the proceedings to the IPAB did not remove the need to examine locus standi and subsequent events. The impugned order was set aside and the matter restored for fresh disposal. en-us Tue, 09 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:36:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191254 In rectification proceedings for removal of a trade mark under Sections 46 and 56 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, the applicant must remain a "person aggrieved" until final decision, and that grievance must still subsist when removal is ordered. The SC held that the concept of "person aggrieved" has different implications under Sections 46 and 56, and that a lapse in the applicant's live grievance defeats justification for rectification. It further held that transfer of the proceedings to the IPAB did not remove the need to examine locus standi and subsequent events. The impugned order was set aside and the matter restored for fresh disposal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 09 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191254