1. ' The appellant had applied to the respondent for registration of trade mark containing the word "GRINNELL" in Class 1 in respect of "CHEMICALS AND ADHESIVES" used in the Industry of Fire extinguisher. The respondent by his order dated 28-9-1991, refused to register the aforesaid trade mark on the ground that the word "GRINNELL" conflicted phonetically with an earlier registered trade mark containing the word "GRIND WELL". It was observed by the respondent that the sounds of consonents "D" and "W" in the registered Trade Mark "GRIND WELL" are bound to be slurred rendering it phonetically similar to the subject mark "GRINNELL"
2. Mr. Irfan learned counsel for the appellant strenuously urged that the respondent wrongly observed that the sounds of consonents "D" and "W" in the registered Trade Mark "GRIND WELL" were bound to be slurred, as firstly letters "D" and "W" of the English language have emphatic sounds and are generally used as "ENDINGS" of words, hence there are not likely to be slurred in the same manner as soft sounding alphabets like "A", "E", "I", "0" and "W". Mr. Irfan further submitted that "GRIND WELL" is not a word like "TOUGH" "BOROUGH" etc., where some letters may be silent and not slurred. Mr. Irfan pointed out that the Trade Mark "GRIND WELL" is registered in respect of "CERAMIC GLAZING" whereas the applied Trade Mark "GRINNELL" pertains to the Industry producing fire extinguishing Chemicals etc. ' Mr. Irfan submitted that neither there is phonetic similarity between the two trade marks, nor they pertain to the same Industry, hence there was no justification for refusal of the registration of the trade mark applied for by the appellant.
3. ' None appeared for the respondent.
4. ' After going through the submissions of Mr. Irfan, I am of the view that neither phonetic nor Industrywise similarity exists between the two trade marks namely "GRIND WELL and "GRINNELL" as such there was no justification for the respondent to refuse the registration of the trade mark applied for by the appellant. Accordingly present appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 28-9-1991 passed by the respondent is hereby set aside.
5. ' The respondent is directed to proceed with the registration of appellant's application for registraion of word "GRINNELL" as a trade mark under No,99585 in Class 1 by accepting and advertising the said application of appellant in the Trade Marks Journal. Parties to bear thier own costs.