1989 (8) TMI 198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Mehta, for the Respondents. [Oral Judgment].  - Prior to the coming into force of the Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951, the petitioners were manufacturing typewriters. They were, after the Act came into force, registered under Item 13(1) of the First Schedule to the said Act. Item 13 deals with Commercial, office and household equipment and sub-item (1) thereof with "ty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Act was wide enough to include all types of typewriters, whether manual, electrical or electronic, and if they were to undertake the manufacture of electronic typewriters with their existing plant, machinery and equipment and market them under the trade name 'Godrej', they would not be manufacturing a new article as contemplated by the Act. On 4th January, 1983, the petitioners were again inform....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s hearing stage, Mr. Dalal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, based his argument upon the definition of "new article" in Section 3(dd) (b) of the Act. So far as is relevant to the present case, a new article thereunder means any article which bears a mark as defined in the Trade Marks Act, 1940, if at the date of registration the industrial undertaking was not manufacturing or produci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rst respondents and it is there stated that the petitioners intended to market their electronic typewriters "under the trade mark Godrej". Such material as there is on record, therefore, suggests that the electronic typewriters were not to be marketed under a trade mark other than that already used on standard typewriters. That being so, electronic typewriters cannot constitute a new article withi....