Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) has held that mere production of solitary document and that too a suspected one is not enough to establish by itself ‘prior use’ and adoption continuously for a substantial period. The Board in this regard noted that the opponent to the registration of the trademark ‘Viking’ in Class 12, had produced a solitary document, namely sales invoice for the year 1976 and had not produced any sales figure for that year by producing any authenticated document. Reliance for this purpose was placed by the Board on Delhi High Court decision in the case of Roshan Lal Duggar & Co. [AIR 1978 Delhi 250].

It was also noted that the respondents had already, even prior to present registration, obtained registration in Class 7 in respect of the impugned trade mark relating to automobile parts. Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal, in its Order dated 24-8-2015, was of the view that the Assistant Registrar had rightly held that the respondent /applicant’s were even otherwise entitled for registration by virtue of honest and concurrent user.