1999 (12) TMI 793

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Appellant. Shri S. Kannan, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Ashtana, Member (T) (Oral)]. - Since the issue in both the stay applications and connected appeals is identical and the applicant is the same, therefore, these two stay applications are being considered together by this common order. 2. Learned Consultant for the applicants submits that the issue concerns th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... mark, whereas the department has wrongly relied on the decision in the case of Astra Pharmaceuticals as reported in 1995 (75) E.L.T. 214 for the simple reason that the appellants had long time ago applied for registration of the said trade mark and that apart from the alphabets used, logo is also used which clearly denotes that they are having proprietorship of their products. He further submits ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (Appeals) has, as usual, not given any personal hearing, while considering the appellants stay applications pending before him and passing the interim stay orders. We find that the granting of hearing is necessary in terms of Section 35A(1) of the Act and therefore, the reliance on the case of Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd. as noted therein is misplaced, as the said decision was in the context of s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....refore, the order of the lower authorities to that effect would be erroneous. This having great force, we find that the applicant established that they have a highly arguable case on merits. In view of this, we direct the applicants to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lacs fifty thousand only) with respect to their stay application No. E/St/729/99 in Appeal No. E/1525/99 arising out....