Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Stamp Duty on Authorisation Documents for Trademark Agents
In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has clarified that authorisation documents filed by trademark agents must be stamped as a power of attorney, aligning with the requirements under the relevant Stamp Act. The judgment, delivered by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, dismissed the writ petition filed by John Vadassery, a trademark agent, challenging the insistence on stamped authorisation for trademark agents appearing before the Trade Marks Registry.
The petitioner, John Vadassery, argued that the authorisation required under Section 145 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, should not be equated to a power of attorney, and hence should not be liable for stamp duty. He contended that a plain authorisation, as prescribed under the Act, should suffice without necessitating the execution and stamping of a power of attorney.
The court, however, disagreed with Vadassery’s submissions, stating that the authorisation prescribed under Section 145 of the Trade Marks Act, read with Rule 19 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017, indeed has all the characteristics of a power of attorney. The court observed that such an authorisation creates a right for the agent to represent the principal, accept service, appear before the Registry, and perform acts binding on the principal. As such, it falls under the definition of an instrument as per the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959, and is liable to be stamped under the relevant Stamp Act.
Further, the judgment noted that the Registrar of Trade Marks, being neither a Court nor a Tribunal, does not fall under the purview of court fee provisions, thereby necessitating the applicability of stamp duty to authorisations filed before it. The court emphasized that the levy of stamp duty is a fiscal measure intended to generate revenue for the State and is applicable to such instruments.
The court also referred to previous judgments, including those in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. Dilip Construction Company and Dr. Chiranji Lal v. Haridas, to support its stance on the applicability of stamp duty to instruments that confer a right to act on behalf of another.
In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner’s claims and upholding the requirement for a stamped power of attorney for trademark agent authorisations. This decision reinforces the fiscal policies pertaining to stamp duties and clarifies the legal standing of authorisation documents in the context of trademark registrations.
Bottom Line :
Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Authorisation executed in favour of trademark agent under Section 145 read with Rule 19 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 is an instrument creating right to act on behalf of principal and has all trappings of a power of attorney - Such authorisation is liable to be stamped under relevant Stamp Act where executed - Registrar of Trade Marks is neither Court nor Tribunal and court-fee provisions are inapplicable.
Statutory provision(s): Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 145, Trade Marks Rules, 2017 Rule 19, Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 Sections 2(j) and 2(p)
John Vadassery v. Registrar of Trademarks, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc id # 2991181
