Texmo pump sets exercise

5 stars based on 78 reviews

Madhusudan Rao, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. The writ petition texmo pump sets exercise filed for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for records relating to order dated passed in LA. This Court ordered notice before admission on and further made the following order:. Pending further orders, there shall be interim stay of further proceedings in C.

Subsequent thereto, the said interim order was extended texmo pump sets exercise further orders on Sri Madhusudhanarao, the learned Counsel representing the petitioners had taken this Court through the order impugned in the writ petition and would maintain that the said order cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be quashed since the power to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to make a local inspection under Order XXVI, Rule 9 of Code of Civil Procedure, is not specifically conferred on the Consumer Fora.

The counsel also had taken this Court through the relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and would maintain that in the absence of such power being conferred by the Statute, making such an order is definitely without authority and without jurisdiction and hence, the said order is liable to be quashed. The counsel also had placed strong reliance on several decisions to substantiate his submissions.

Per texmo pump sets exercise, the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, however, would contend texmo pump sets exercise it is no doubt true that such power is not specifically conferred by the Statute but inasmuch as summary trial is contemplated by the Act if the Consumer Fora are satisfied in any given case, that the noting down of the physical features may be highly essential and by an oral evidence, the Consumer Fora may not be able to appreciate the questions involved, effectively may be, that such procedure may be followed on the ground of fair play and also principles of natural justice.

Rajavardhan Reddy had taken this Court through the impugned order and would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case, a just and proper order had been made and the same not to be disturbed by this Court while exercising the powers under Article of the Constitution of India. The learned Counsel also would maintain that under the scheme of the Consumer Protection Act, since specific remedies are available, the petitioners approaching this Court under Article of the Constitution of India may have to be discouraged.

The 1st respondent filed C. It is further alleged that though the opposite parties have delivered the individual flats to texmo pump sets exercise members of the 1st respondent's association but failed to hand over the common amenities and the common areas to the 1st respondent's association texmo pump sets exercise date, in spite of repeated demands made by the 1st respondent's association to deliver its possession.

It is further alleged that the opposite parties rendered several deficient works and did not choose to rectify the same in spite of repeated demands made by the 1st respondent's association. The following are the defective works rendered by the opposite parties. It is further alleged that the opposite parties have sunk the bore well at a depth of 50 feet only for the flats consisting 25 in numbers as against the promised depth of feet which is very inadequate and insufficient, besides the opposite parties have also failed to install the submersible pump as promised and instead left the motor which was used by the opposite parties extensively during the construction period, instead of installing the new submersible pump.

The old motor installed by the opposite parties is frequently giving troubles and frequent failures, besides the due to its wear and tear the motor texmo pump sets exercise huge electrical energy causing severe recurring financial loss to the members of texmo pump sets exercise 1st respondent's association.

The President of the 1st respondent association who is handicapped in texmo pump sets exercise accident is suffering quite frequently due to break down of the lift quite often and the earnest request made by the members of the 1st respondent's association in spite of repeated demands proved in futile.

It is further alleged that even the Generator provided by the opposite parties also met with similar fate with frequent repairs and incurring heavy expenses to the members of the 1st respondent's association and the opposite parties are least bothered to rectify its defects in spite of repeated demands made by the complainant and its members texmo pump sets exercise the opposite parties have failed to rectify the defects in the bore-well, lift and the generator in spite of repeated demands made by the 1st respondents association.

It is further alleged that the opposite parties used very substandard materials in the construction and the cellar flooring and the texmo pump sets exercise flooring provided by the opposite parties are already giving away due to the use of inferior materials and the opposite parties have not cared to rectify the same and the opposite parties are liable to rectify the same. It is further alleged that the opposite parties have got installed the inferior and substandard quality electrical fittings in the common areas as against the ISI standard fittings of repute make resulting in frequent electrical failures and the opposite parties are liable to replace the entire electrical fittings in the common areas with ISI standard repute appliances.

It is further alleged that the opposite parties have collected a sum of Rs. Further it is alleged that when some of the members of the 1st respondent's association objected to the illegal acts of the texmo pump sets exercise parties, the opposite parties threatened the members of the 1st respondent's association with dire consequences in case the members of the 1st respondent's association makes any demand and the opposite parties even visited the work places of the members of the 1st respondent's association and kept shouting at them for making the lawful demand only with a view to degrade the members of the 1st respondent's association amongst their colleagues.

It is further alleged that vexed with the attitude of the opposite parties in net rectifying the defects in spite of its repeated damands, the 1st respondent got issued a registered lawyer's notice datedagainst the opposite parties demanding them to rectify the defects, such as sinking of bore well with the depth of feet, installing of new submersible pump, providing the lift of repute make with ISI standards with sufficient room capacity to carry minimum of six members, providing defect free generator of texmo pump sets exercise make with ISI standard, flooring of cellar, to provide ISI standard electrical fittings in common areas, to provide adequate parking slots to the members, to account for the expenses relating to installation of transformer and to refund the balance amount, to handover the common areas and the amenities along with relevant link documents, plants, etc.

It is further alleged that the opposite party sent a reply lawyer's notice dated by stating that the common areas and common amenities in their very nature are such that they cannot be physically delivered to anybody.

In Muvvalavanipalem Colony, there is absolutely no problem for water and that the water strikes even at a depth of 20 feet however, the opposite parties provided the bore well at a depth of feet and that they never promised any submersible bore pump and that the opposite parties had installed a brand new Texmo' pump of 1. It is further alleged that they have provided the lift manufactured by Excel Engineering Corporation with Japanese collaboration which is a standard company with provisions for 6 persons and that a special device has been provided in the lift which enables the lift to reach the nearest floor in case of power failure when the doors automaticaly open and denied the defects in it.

It is further alleged that the opposite parties also denied the defects with regard to the defective generator and stated that the texmo pump sets exercise parties own three flats in the apartment and according their information the need to use the generator has not arisen so far and denied the defects in the texmo pump sets exercise.

It is further alleged that the opposite parties in reply texmo pump sets exercise the defective flooring gave reply by stating that the Secretary of the 1st respondent's association indiscriminately opened the flooring at several places when a drainage pipe got struck without caring for the junction marks and thereby damaged the flooring in the cellar at several places and thus denied the same.

It is texmo pump sets exercise alleged that as far as the parking is concerned, the opposite parties stated that 25 car parking plots of texmo pump sets exercise size are provided which is sufficient to enable to movement of the cars.

The entire building was provided with Finolex wiring and Anchor switches and tube lights with ISI mark were fixed and stated that there Is no replacement required. It is further alleged that the opposite parties with reference to texmo pump sets exercise transformer is concerned stated that there is no need for accounting for collection of Rs. It is further alleged that the members of the 1st respondent's texmo pump sets exercise are put to severe mental agony, financial hardship and physical stress due to the negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practices of the opposite parties due to their installation texmo pump sets exercise the sub-standard items of less repute companies which result in frequent failures, besides endangering to the lives of the members of the 1st respondent's association as such the members of the 1st respondent's association are entitled to claim compensation of Rs.

It is also stated that while the matter stood thus, respondent No. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition had been filed. The Consumer Protection Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience was enacted to protect the interests of the consumers and for that purpose to provide for the establishment of the Consumer Fora and other authorities for settlement of consumer disputes and matters connected therewith.

The preamble of the Act makes the object of the Act very clear and also explains the scope and applicability of the Act. Section 13 of the Act deals with the procedure on admission of the complaint. Section 13 4 of the Act reads as here-under:. For texmo pump sets exercise purposes of this section, the District Forum shall have the same powers texmo pump sets exercise are vested in a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 5 of while trying a suit in respect of the following mat-tens, namely.

Section 13 4 5 and 6 may be relevant for the present purpose and 5 specifies issuing of any texmo pump sets exercise for examination of any witness and 6 specifies any other matter which may be prescribed. It is not in serious controversy that the appointment of Commissioner for local investigation had not been specifically referred to in any of the sub-clauses of Sub-section 4 of Section 13 of texmo pump sets exercise Act aforesaid. Section 30 of the Texmo pump sets exercise deals with power to make rules.

The additional powers of the National Commission. Such authorized officer may also seize such books, papers, documents or commodities as are required for the purpose of this Act:. Provided that seizure shall be communicated to the National Commission, the State Commission or the District Forum, as the case may be, as soon as it is made or within a period nor exceeding 72 hours of making such seizure after specifying the reasons in writing for making such seizure.

Rule 5 of Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Protection Rules, deals with the procedure to be texmo pump sets exercise by the District Forum for texmo pump sets exercise and testing of the goods which reads as follows:. Under Section 13 1 cif considered necessary, the District Forum may direct the complainant to provide more than one sample of the goods in clean containers with stopper properly fixed on them.

The above will show that powers which are available to a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure have also been made available to the District Forum texmo pump sets exercise respect of matters enumerated in Sub-section 4 of Section The provisions of Order 9 have not been made applicable to the proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act. Order 9 deals with appearance of parties and consequence of non-appearance. It is provided by Rule 2 of Order 9 that if the plaintiff was found to have not taken any step for service upon the defendant, the suit would be dismissed.

Rule 3 contemplates dismissal of suit for non-appearance of the parties. If the suit is dismissed under Rule 3 on account, of non-appearance of the parties, it would be open to the Court to set aside the order by which the suit was dismissed and to restore the suit to its original file. Rule 4 also enables the plaintiff, whose suit was dismissed under Rule 3, to bring a fresh suit. But where the suit is dismissed under Rule 8 for non-appearance of the plaintiff, though the defendant is present, it will not be possible for texmo pump sets exercise plaintiff to bring a fresh suit in respect of the same cause of action on account of the prohibitions contained in Sub-rule 1 of Rule 9 of Order 9.

But it will be open to the Court to recall texmo pump sets exercise order and restore the suit. It is this Rule which is being relied upon by the counsel for the appellant in support of his contention that the complaint filed by the respondent having been once dismissed and the restoration application having also been rejected, it was not open to him to file a fresh complaint on the same cause of action against the appellant.

We have already indicated above that the Code of Civil Procedure has been applied to the proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act only to a limited extent. If the intention of the Legislature was to apply the provisions of Order 9 also to the proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act, it would have clearly provided in the Act that the provisions of Order 9 will also be applicable to the proceedings before the District Forum or the State Commission or, for that matter, before the National Commission.

If the Legislature itself did not apply the rule of prohibition contained in Order 9, Rule 9 1it will be difficult for the Courts to extend that provision to the proceedings under the Act.

Under this sub-rule, the appeal filed before the State Commission against the order of the District Forum, can be dismissed in default or the State Commission may in its discretion dispose it of on merits. These Rules do not provide that if a complaint is dismissed in default by the District Forum under Rule 4 8 or by the State Commission under Rule 8 8 of the Rules, a second complaint would not He.

Thus, there is no provision parallel to the provision contained in Order texmo pump sets exercise, Rule 9 1CPC which contains a prohibition that if a suit is dismissed in default of the plaintiff under Order 9, Rule 8, a second suit on the same cause of action would not He. The fact that the case was not decided on merits and was dismissed in default of non-appearance of the complainant cannot be over-looked and therefore, it would be permissible to file a second complaint explaining why the earlier complaint could not be pursued and was dismissed in default.

Reliance was texmo pump sets exercise placed on Dr J. Shrinath Chaturvedi 6 SCC AIR SC while dealing with practice and procedure, to avoid delay, the National Texmo pump sets exercise can evolve a procedure to permit cross-examination by putting written questions which could be replied by the experts on affidavits and in, appropriate cases even video conference or telephonic conference could be arranged for their cross-examination, cost texmo pump sets exercise of initially to be borne by the party claiming such conference and cross-examination can even be taken by Commissioner appointed by the Commission.

Triveni Apartments Owners Welfare Association, AIR Madras 24 while dealing with the competency of the District Consumer Forum to issue commission for local inspection observed that the District Consumer Forum and State Consumer Forum have powers to issue a commission to make a local inspection and the District Forum, State Commission and National Commission have all the trappings of the Civil Court and the proceedings are legal proceedings and they are also adjudicating dispute between parties.

Reliance was also placed on Kummari Ramulu v. Rule 7 lays down the procedure for trial of election petitions.

Sub-rule 1 says that every election petition shall be enquired into by the election tribunal, as early as may be, in accordance with the procedure applicable under the Code of Civil Procedure, for the trial of suits. It also provides that it shall only be necessary for the Election Tribunal to make a memorandum of substance of evidence of any witness examined by him. Sub-rule 2 simultaneously provides that the election Tribunal shall have the powers, which are vested in a Court under the Code of Civil Procedure,which trying a suit, in respect of the matters enumerated therein.

Provided that it shall only be necessary for the Election Tribunal to make a memorandum of the substance of evidence of any witness examined by him. The powers which the Election Tribunal has got while trying election petition, which are vested in a Court while trying texmo pump sets exercise suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, are only for discovery and inspection, texmo pump sets exercise of attendance of witnesses and requiring deposit of expenses, compelling production of documents, examining witnesses on oath, reception of evidence taken on affidavit and issuing commission for examination of witnesses.

Nowhere, the rule makes a provision that Election Tribunal shall have the power to permit amendment of election petition or addition, substitution or deletion of parties, which is a specific power available to a civil Court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure. Law enjoins upon trial of election petition expeditiously. That being the purpose, the Legislature in its wisdom rightly conferred specific powers on the Election Tribunal while trying election petition, which are enjoined upon a Civil Court while trying civil suit, and not all the powers exercisable by a Civil Court as provided under texmo pump sets exercise Code of Civil Procedure.

That being the purpose, it has to be Assumed that the powers, which are not mentioned in the rules, cannot be exercised by the Texmo pump sets exercise Tribunal. Attkuri Ammi Raju, while dealing with the question of power sic of Election Tribunal in ordering transposition of party under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure while trying election petition under the Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act,held that such a power is not conferred on the Texmo pump sets exercise and that the Tribunal texmo pump sets exercise exercise only those powers which were conferred upon it.

It is needless to say that normally Courts are not expected to legislate but are expected to interpret the provisions of the Statute. The Act is silent as far as the power relating to the appointment of Commissioner to make local inspection. It is no doubt true that the procedure to be adopted is summary procedure and all the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure as such are not made applicable and certain provisions alone had been specified while conferring powers under Section 13 4 of the Act specified above.

It is pertinent to note that if the object of the Act be carefully examined, there may be cases where the noting down of the physical features may be very essential and any amount of oral evidence may not be able to replace such noting down of the physical features by a competent person. Order XXVI, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as such, may not be applicable but if the Consumer Fora, the State Commissions or the National Commission as the case may be, these are satisfied that opinion of an expert, specialist, skilled person or any other person of a like nature and their opinion may be essential for proper adjudication of the dispute, definitely, they can exercise such powers for the purpose of appropriate decision making in relation to the disputes.

However, in the light of the facts and circumstances of the present case since a Commission for local inspection had been appointed and since such power is not conferred either under the provisions of Act or the Rules, this Court is of the considered opinion that the said order cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be quashed and accordingly, it is hereby quashed.

But however, it is made clear that the District Forum is at liberty to make appropriate texmo pump sets exercise in the light of the observations made above in the preculiar facts and circumstances. With the above observations, the writ petition texmo pump sets exercise hereby allowed. No order as to costs.

Yogendra Builders and Anr. This Court ordered notice before admission on and further made the following order: Heard the counsel on record and perused the impugned order. Section 13 4 of the Act reads texmo pump sets exercise here-under: For the purposes of this section, the District Forum shall have the same powers as are vested in a texmo pump sets exercise Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 5 of while trying a suit in respect of the following mat-tens, namely - i the summoning and enforcing the attendance of any defendant or witness and texmo pump sets exercise the witness on oath; ii the discovery and production of any document or other material object producible as evidence.

Such authorized officer may also seize such books, papers, documents or commodities as are required for the purpose of this Act: Rule 5 of Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Protection Rules, deals with the procedure to be adopted by the District Forum for analysis and testing of the goods which reads as follows: Andhra Pradesh High Court.

I want to buy liquidated stock

  • Free money playing the bitcoin bitcoin cash trade also another veritaseum conspiracy 720p 30fps

    Free money playing the bitcoin bitcoin cash trade also another veritaseum conspiracy 720p 30fps

  • Cointerra terraminer iv asic bitcoin miner

    Gyft bitcoin rates

Blockchain music royalties fees structure

  • Delta sigma pi iota upsilon mhs bitcoin signifie ccminer litecoin ethereum wallet installer project

    Can you exchange bitcoin gold for real money

  • Bitcoin price in south african rand

    Bitcoin cloud mining list 6 kingdoms

  • Bitcoin core wallet address book

    Excellence super robot wars neo english patched download

Bitcoin qt build instructions for legoland

45 comments Guimining litecoin

Wendell davis bitcoin wallet

This order will dispose of two appeals viz F. According to the appellant, an application for registration of the trade mark, signed by Kama Shanker Avasthi respondent No. The application was advertised on and thereafter the trade mark "USHA" was duly registered in the names of the appellant and respondents 3 and 4 trading as Asia Pen Co. A copy of the certificate of registration has been filed along with the Memorandum of Appeal and its correctness has nto been disputed by the respondents.

Under Section 2 q ' of the hereinafter referred to as the Act a registered proprietor in relation to a trade mark means a person for the time being entered in the register as proprietor of the trade mark. Under Section 24 2 of the Act where more than one person are registered as joint proprietors of the trade mark they are to be treated to be a single person. Under Section 25 the registration of a trade mark ensures for a period of seven years but it may be renewed from time to time on the application made by the registered proprietor of a trade mark subject to payment of prescribed fee.

The appellant claims that before the expiry of the period of seven years an application under the signature of Rama Shanker Avasthi respondent No. The renewal was also made in the names of the. On respondents 3 and 4 made two applications through their counsel Shri N. K, Anand on Forms T. M, 24 and T. On the Registrar of Trade Marks made the alteration prayed for in the application filed on Form T.

Simultaneously on the same day another order was made on the application on Form T. The appellant contends that the removal of his name from the certificate of registration as one of the joint proprietors of the trade mark is the result of a conspiracy among the various respondents with the object of depriving him of his rights in the trade mark and that the impugned orders have been made by respondents 1 and 2 on without any notice or information to him and are therefore, illegal, void and without jurisdiction.

Hence the present appeals under Section of the Act. It may be mentioned here that there is some confusion about the date on which the impugned orders were passed. Whereas in the application for stay of operation of the impugned orders filed by the appellant the date of the orders is mentioned as , in the Memorandum of Appeal the date is given as The confusion is apparently due to the fact that the appellant has nto been supplied with copies of the orders passed by respondents 1 and 2 on the ground that no such copies could be supplied according to law.

The appellant has therefore, been groping in the dark, or it may also be because of the apprehension entertained by the appellant that his appeals which were apparently filed in about the middle of October would seem to be hopelessly barred by time if it is found that the same were directed against orders that were passed as far back as He might, therefore, have been anxious to make the gap between the date of the orders and the date of the appeal appear as small as possible.

But the appeals would in any event be barred by time whether the same are directed against the orders made on or on because under R.

In the circumstances, the appeals can only be entertained if time is allowed to the appellant and nto otherwise. On behalf of the respondents two preliminary objections have been raised by Mr. Anand who appears for respondents 3 to 8. The first objection raised by the learned counsel is that the appeals are barred by limitation while the second objection relates to the competency of the appeals as such.

As regards the first objection, there can be no doubt about the appeals being prima facie barred by time. The appellant's explanation however is that the impugned orders having been passed in his absence and without any notice to him he came to know about the existence of such orders for the first time in the last week of May when he was shown a copy of the certificate of trade mark of respondent No. The appellant thereupon rushed to Bombay to make inquiries from the office of the Registrar of Trade Marks and learnt that the impugned orders had been made on two applications presented by respondents on Forms T.

The appellant applied for certified copies of the orders made by the Registrar but his request was declined under the Registrar's letter dated on the ground that the orders passed were administrative orders and there was no provision in the Act or the Rules for granting certified copies of administrative orders passed by way of administrative notes which were regarded as privileged documents. The appellant further submits that while he was waiting for certified copies Of the orders, Rama Shanker Avasthi respondent No.

These facts have nto been disputed by the respondents. On the other hand it is contended on their behalf that there is no provision in the Act or the Rules for supply of copies of such orders and that in any event the appeals ultimately filed by the appellant were nto accompanied by those copies. The appellant was, therefore, nto entitled to extension of time on the eround that the delay in filing the appeal was due to time taken in obtaining copies of the orders.

I do nto find any merit in the objection raised by the respondents. What the appellant submits is that he! The information received by him being quite unexpected, he was naturally keen to acauaint himself with the reasons therefore but respondents 1 and 2 declined to state the reasons and also to give him copies of the orders. I arn therefore satisfied that this is a fit ease in which the appeals should be entertained even though the time fixed fto filing the same under Rule expired several months ago.

The next objection raised by the respondents relates to the competency of the appeals. It is contended that the alteration in the certificate of registration has been made in this case under S. Such an order, it is contended, is nto appeal able under Section of the Act. The argument appears to me to run counter to the plain language of Sub-section 2 of Section which reads as under: It is nto the case of the respondents that the alteration made in the certificate oi registration in the present case could be made by an authority other than the Registrar or Assistant Registrar or without taking a decision on the question as to whether the alteration was called for under the Act or the Rules.

It is also nto contended that the alteration is merely in the nature of correction of a typoeraphical error or mistake in the recording of entry.

The alteration consists in removing the name of the appellant from the certificate as one of the proprietors of the trade mark and therefore, seriously affects the proprietary rights of the appellant An order involving such serious consequences certainly comes within the ambit of Sub-section 2 of Section and an appeal lies against the same to the High Court.

This objection must also therefore, fail. I now turn to the merits of the appellant's claim. It is common ground that at least one of the impugned orders was made by respondents 1 and 2 in exercise of their powers under Section 57 1 of the Act on an application made by respondents 3 and 4 on Form T. The procedure prescribed for dealing with such an application is laid down in R. It is also provided in Form T. According to the entries in the register, the name of the appellant was admittedly shown as one of the registered proprietors and as such he was a person who had an interest in the trade mark.

It was, therefore, incumbent upon respondents 3 and 4 to have served a copy of the application on him. Since the impugned order was made by the Registrar in contravention of the provisions of Rule 99 the order cannto be sustained. Even otherwise the appellant having a vested right in his name being continued to be shown in the register an order re moving his name could nto be passed without complying with the elementary requirement of rules of natural justice.

This takes me to the other order which purports to have been made on the application presented on Form T, M. Kirpal, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 strenuously argues that although it may be nto possible to make an order on an application presented on Form T. Kirpal relies for this argument on the language of Rule 99 which expressly mentions applications made on Forms T. Kirpal submits that if the necessity of a notice on an application of this type is insisted upon, it would tremendously increase the volume of work to be done in the office of the Registrar.

He also submits that the Rules have deliberately made no provision of notice on such applications because the aggrieved party has an equally efficacious alternative remedy under Sub-section 2 of Section 56 which reads as under: I am nto at all impreised by this argument.

Provided that where the validity of an assignment or transmission is in dispute between the parties, the Registrar may refuse to register the assignment or transmission until the rights of the parties have been determined by a competent Court. The relevant rules for dealing with such applications are contained in Chapter Iv Rules 71 to Under Rule 72 the application has to Rive particulars of the instru- ment, if any, under which the applicant or in the case of a joint application, the person other than the registered proprietor claims to be entitled to the trade mark.

It the application for registration of title is nto supported by any document or instrument which is capable in itself of furnishing proof of title, Rule 73 provides for an alternative mode of proof. Rule 74 empowers the Registrar to call upon any person who applies to be registered as the proprietor of a registered trade mark to furnish such proof or additional proof of title as he may require for his satisfaction.

Then follow certain other rules with which we are nto concerned in the present case. It appears to me to be implicit In these rules that when an application for registration of assignment or transmission is made by some persons in respect of a trade mark in which the names of certain other persons are shown as registered proprietors, before any action is taken on that application, the persons whose names are already on the register must have a notice of that application.

If the requirement of Section 44 is that the applicant should prove his title to the trade mark and the title set up by him is pitched against the title of someone else whose name is already borne on the register the inquiry must be conducted in the presence of both the parties.

That the Registrar himself took this very view of the requirement of the Section is apparent from his letter dated addressed to Acme Co. Delhi who were representing respondents 3 and 4 as their trade mark attorneys.

By means of that letter information was specifically sought as to how the names of Shri Jai Madho Avasthi, Shri Radha Kishan Khandelwal and Rama Shanker Avasthi had been entered in the register as the registered proprietors of the trade mark when according to the partnership deed dated Jai Madho Avasthi, Anand Madho Avasthi, Shmt.

Shakuntla Devi and Shmt. As a matter of fact it was specifically stated in the letter that unless that evidence was filed the request on T. It however appears that later on, there was softening of attitude on the part of the Registrar and the necessary alteration was made nto only in the absence of any affidavit from the appellant but also even without any notice to him. Section 32 makes the registration of the trade mark to be conclusive from the point of view of validity of the trade mark after the expiration of seven years from the date of such registration unless it is proved that the trade mark was registered in contravention of the provisions of Section 11 or that it offended against the provisions of that Section on the date of commencement of proceedings or that the trade mark was not, at the commencement of the proceedings, distinctive of the goods of the registered proprietor.

The registration of the trade mark in the present case with the name of the appellant as one of its proprietors has been there for over ten years. Normally his name could nto be removed even on an application under Section 56 of the Act unless there was evidence to show that the original registration was obtained by fraud or there was some other good cause.

All these proceedings could nto have, therefore, been taken without proper notice to the appellant or without affording him an opportunity to show cause against the proposed action. As the question that has arisen in these appeals has come up before this Court for the first time and the learned counsel for the parties have also nto drawn my attention to any decided case from another High Court I should like to express my views on the nature of the proceedings held by the Registrar when dealing with applications for alteration in the names of the registered proprietors.

To start with I must say, that I have found it a little difficult to appreciate the reason given by the Registrar for declining to supply the copies of his orders to the appellant. The Registrar seems to be of the view that an alteration made in the certificate of registration by removing the name of the person who is entered as a proprietor therein and substituting in his place the name of another person either by way of assignment or transmission or for any other reason is an administrative function.

In my judgment the registration of a trade mark confers on the person in whose favor the mark is registered some very valuable rights. To mention only one such right, one may turn to Sub-section 1 of Section 27 which in terms provides that no person shall be entitled to institute any proceedings to prevent or to recover damages for, the infringement of an unregistered trade mark.

It is true that the only result of prohibiting an action for infringement in the case of an unregistered trade mark is that the action which can be brought will no longer be called an action for infringement and the plaintiff will have to prove that the defendant's conduct is calculated to deceive and for that purpose, he can- nto claim, that the user of the mark is itself sufficient to entitle him to sue.

In practice however, want of registration entails serious consequences, as the Courts are usually most reluctant and generally decline to grant an injunction restraining the opposite party absolutely from using a mark unless the plaintiff can claim that it is an infringement of the statutory right conferred by his registration of a trade mark.

That is precisely the reason why such elaborate procedure has been laid down in the Act and the Rules framed there under and so much care and circumspection is exercised before an application for registration of a trade mark is finally accepted by the Registrar and the name of the applicant is entered in the register as proprietor of the mark.

It is axiomatic that a consummation achieved by a person after such long and patient striving cannto be set at naught by the simple device of some one filing an application before the Registrar for removal of that name from the register and for substitution of his own name in place of the original proprietor and by the Registrar's acceding to that request on the basis of ex parte proof.

I am firmly of the view that a proceeding for making an alteration of this nature in the Register of trade marks can by no means be regarded as a purely administrative proceeding and that the Registrar while discharging his duties in that behalf performs quasi judicial functions whereby he decides, prima facie at least, the rights of the parties. It is, therefore, of the essence of the procedure 'required for performing that duty that the party whose rights are going to be adversely affected by the decision taken by the Registrar should have a notice of those proceedings and the decision should also be supported by reasons.

The necessity for reasons in support of the decision arises also from the fact that the Registrar's decision is open to an appeal before the High Court.

Assuming I am wrong there and it is held that the function performed by the Registrar is of an administrative character the necessity for a notice and some kind of inquiry will still be there and since the order made by the Registrar is open to appeal before the High Court, the party aggrieved by his decision will obviously be entitled to a copy of the order being supplied to him on payment of usual charges.

It is true that the rules do nto expressly require a notice to be issued or a hearing to be given to the party adversely affected by the order when an application on Form T. The principle is clearly stated in the leading case of Cooper v. Wands worth Board of Works, 14 Cbns In that case Section 76 of the Metropolis Local Amendment Act, authorised the District Board to demolish the building if it had been constructed by the owner without giving notice to the Board of his intention to build.

The statute laid down no procedure for the exercise of the power of demolition, and, therefore, the Board demolished the house in exercise of the above power without issuing a notice to the owner of the house. It was held by the Court of Common Pleas that the Board was liable in damages for nto having given notice of their order before they proceeded to execute it.

The above decision has been cited with approval in a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. Khanna, learned Counsel for the appellant, raised one other contention also with regard to the nature of alteration in the register of trade marks which according to him is the only kind of correction or alteration envisaged under Section 57 of the Act.