Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999
Subject : Intellectual Property Law - Trademark Rectification
In a decisive judgment for intellectual property protection, the
The dispute centered on the iconic ‘ELANTE’ brand, which is synonymous with high-end commercial complexes, shopping malls, and office suites. The petitioner, CSJ Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, has been utilizing the ‘ELANTE’ moniker since 2011, having filed for its first trademark registration in 2010.
The trouble began in August 2024, when CSJ Infrastructure discovered that Elante Residencies Ltd, with Mr. Akash Kohli as a Director, was using the same mark for real estate development services. Despite a legal notice and an attempt at pre-litigation mediation, the respondents refused to cease their operations, leading the petitioner to approach the High Court seeking the rectification of the Trade Marks Register.
CSJ Infrastructure argued that as the prior adopter and user of the ‘ELANTE’ mark for over a decade, their brand had earned immense goodwill. They contended that the respondent’s subsequent adoption of the mark in 2019 and 2020 was a clear case of "dishonest adoption."
The respondents, despite being served notice, chose not to appear or file a reply. Consequently, the High Court proceeded ex-parte . Justice Tejas Karia noted that in the absence of a rebuttal, the allegations of the petitioner were deemed to be admitted.
The Court relied heavily on the established legal doctrine that a prior user's rights override those of a subsequent registrant. Referencing Neon Laboratories Ltd. v. Medical Technologies Ltd. , the bench highlighted that subsequent registration cannot shield an entity that has acted with mala fide intent.
Justice Karia identified that the Impugned Marks were registered under a "proposed to be used" basis, yet the respondents failed to demonstrate any legitimate usage or bona fide intent. By failing to use the marks for a continuous period of five years following registration, the respondents rendered the marks vulnerable to removal under the Trade Marks Act.
Finding that the continued existence of the infringing marks on the register was incorrect and harmful to the petitioner’s established brand, the Court allowed the petitions. The Registrar of Trade Marks has been directed to expunge registrations Nos. 4288558, 4394146, and 4558370 from the Register.
This judgment serves as a stern reminder to companies attempting to "squat" on established brand names in the hopes of leveraging existing goodwill. For property developers and brand managers, it clarifies that registration is not an absolute shield when it attempts to usurp the identity of an established, prior-user enterprise.
View the social posts created for this story.
Prior User - Trademark Rectification - Bad Faith Adoption - Intellectual Property - Commercial Complex Branding
#TrademarkLaw #DelhiHighCourt
Accommodation Requests Do Not Constitute Mala Fide Transfers: MP High Court Upholds Government Authority
23 Jun 2026
Denial of 7th Pay Commission to NHM Employees Despite Approved Service Bye-laws is Arbitrary: Punjab & Haryana High Court
23 Jun 2026
Arbitrary Termination of Long-Term Workers Illegal: Orissa HC
29 Jun 2026
POCSO Court Awards Death Penalty to 65-Year-Old Convict
30 Jun 2026
Senior Citizens Act Cannot Be Invoked for Title Disputes Unless Section 23 Applies: Allahabad High Court
04 Jul 2026
Vague And Nebulous Allegations Do Not Warrant Judicial Interference In Policy Matters: Patna High Court
04 Jul 2026
12-Year Possession Mandatory To Resist Land Eviction: Jharkhand HC
04 Jul 2026
Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash Statewide ATS Probe Into Funding Of 4,000 Unaided Madrassas
04 Jul 2026
Advocates Have No Right to Demand Out-Of-Turn Listing of Cases: Madras High Court
07 Jul 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.