![[09/04, 17:52] sekarreporter1: https://www.sekarreporter.com/sri-krishna-sweets-trademark-dispute-between-brothers-m-krishnan-and-m-murali-justice-senthilkumar-ramamoorthy-of-madrashighcourt-refuses-to-summon-the-deputy-registrar-of-trademarks-to-tender-evi/ [09/04, 17:52] sekarreporter1: In the ongoing trademark dispute between brothers M. Krishnan and M. Murali (Sri Krishna Sweets) concerning the mark “KRISHNA,” the Madras High Court, presided over by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, declined to summon the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks to tender evidence. Madhan Babu and K. V. Subha appeared as counsel for Mr. Murali, while Sridhar appeared on behalf of Sri Krishna Sweets Pvt. Ltd. The present application was filed by the Respondent in the rectification petition instituted by Murali against Sri Krishna Sweets Pvt. Ltd. The dispute centres on the nature of the trademark “KRISHNA,” specifically whether it constitutes a word mark or a device mark. The applicant had sought to summon the Deputy Registrar under Section 138 of the Trade Marks Act to clarify alleged discrepancies in the “legal use certificate” issued by the Registry. The Court held that no useful purpose would be served by summoning the Deputy Registrar and observed that the parties are at liberty to advance their respective arguments on the classification of the mark at the stage of final hearing. Matter posted to 29.04.26](https://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
[09/04, 17:52] sekarreporter1: https://www.sekarreporter.com/sri-krishna-sweets-trademark-dispute-between-brothers-m-krishnan-and-m-murali-justice-senthilkumar-ramamoorthy-of-madrashighcourt-refuses-to-summon-the-deputy-registrar-of-trademarks-to-tender-evi/ [09/04, 17:52] sekarreporter1: In the ongoing trademark dispute between brothers M. Krishnan and M. Murali (Sri Krishna Sweets) concerning the mark “KRISHNA,” the Madras High Court, presided over by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, declined to summon the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks to tender evidence. Madhan Babu and K. V. Subha appeared as counsel for Mr. Murali, while Sridhar appeared on behalf of Sri Krishna Sweets Pvt. Ltd. The present application was filed by the Respondent in the rectification petition instituted by Murali against Sri Krishna Sweets Pvt. Ltd. The dispute centres on the nature of the trademark “KRISHNA,” specifically whether it constitutes a word mark or a device mark. The applicant had sought to summon the Deputy Registrar under Section 138 of the Trade Marks Act to clarify alleged discrepancies in the “legal use certificate” issued by the Registry. The Court held that no useful purpose would be served by summoning the Deputy Registrar and observed that the parties are at liberty to advance their respective arguments on the classification of the mark at the stage of final hearing. Matter posted to 29.04.26
[09/04, 17:52] sekarreporter1: https://www.sekarreporter.com/sri-krishna-sweets-trademark-dispute-between-brothers-m-krishnan-and-m-murali-justice-senthilkumar-ramamoorthy-of-madrashighcourt-refuses-to-summon-the-deputy-registrar-of-trademarks-to-tender-evi/ [09/04, 17:52] sekarreporter1: In the ongoing trademark dispute between brothers M. Krishnan and M. Murali (Sri Krishna Sweets) concerning the mark “KRISHNA,” the Madras High Court, presided over by Justice...
