IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. HARI SHANKAR, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, JJ.
Ashiana Ispat Limited - Appellant
Versus
Kamdhenu Limited & Ors. - Respondents
LPA 407/2025, CM APPL. 36781/2025 & CM APPL. 36783/2025
Decided on : 03-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute regarding advertisement of trademark applications. (Para 5) |
| 2. impugned judgment highlights deficiencies in trademark registration processes. (Para 7) |
| 3. maintainability of writ petitions under article 226. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. In view of the nature of the dispute, we deem it appropriate to commence this judgment by recounting the procedure for registration of a trade mark, under the Trade Marks Act, 1999[“the TMA” hereinafter] read with the Trade Marks Rules, 2017[“the TMR” hereinafter.]
2. Procedure for registration of a trade mark
2.1 Any application, seeking registration of a trade mark, is required to be submitted under Section 18(1)[18. Application for registration. –
(1) Any person claiming to be the proprietor of a trade mark used or proposed to be used by him, who is desirous of registering it, shall apply in writing to the Registrar in the prescribed manner for the registration of his trade mark.] of the TMA, to the Registrar of Trade Marks. Section 18(4)[Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Registrar may refuse the application or may accept it absolutely or subject to such amendments, modifications, conditions or limitations, if any, as he may think fit.] empowers the Registrar to either refuse the application, or accept it, absolutely or conditionally. Section 19[19. Withdrawal of acceptance. – Where, after the acceptance of an application for registration of a trade mark but before its registration, the Registrar is satisfied—
(a) that the application has been accepted in error; or
(b) that in the circumstances of the case the trade mark should not be registered or should be registered subject to conditions or limitations or to conditions additional to or different from the conditions or limitations subject to which the application has been accepted,
the Registrar may, after hearing the applicant if he so desires, withdraw the acceptance and proceed as if the application had not been accepted.] further empowers the Registrar, if he feels that the application ought not to have been accepted, or that it should have been accepted subject to conditions other than those subject to which it was accepted, to withdraw the acceptance. If the application is accepted, Section 20(1)[20. Advertisement of application. –
(1) When an application for registration of a trade mark has been accepted, whether absolutely or subject to conditions or limitations, the Registrar shall, as soon as may be after acceptance, cause the application as accepted together with the conditions or limitations, if any, subject to which it has been accepted, to be advertised in the prescribed manner:
Provided that the Registrar may cause the application to be advertised before acceptance if it relates to a trade mark to which sub-section (1) of Section 9 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 11 apply, or in any other case where it appears to him that it is expedient by reason of any exceptional circumstances so to do.] requires the Registrar to advertise the application, along with the conditions, if any, subject to which it was accepted.[7 The proviso to Section 20(1) permits the Registrar to advertise the application before acceptance in certain exceptional cases. We are not concerned with a situation in which the proviso applies.] Any person who seeks to oppose the registration of the trade mark may then, under Section 21(1)[21. Opposition to registration. –
(1) Any person may, within four months from the date of the advertisement or re-advertisement of an application for registration, give notice in writing in the prescribed manner and on payment of such fee as may be prescribed, to the Registrar, of opposition to the registration.], submit a notice of opposition, with the Registrar. The Registrar would, under Section 21(2)[(2) The Registrar shall serve a copy of the notice on the applicant for registration and, within two months from the receipt by the applicant of such copy of the notice of opp
T.K. Lathika v Seth Karsandas Jamnadas
Jai Bhagwan Gupta v Registrar of Trade Marks & Ors.
W.B. Central School Service Commission v Abdul Halim
United Bank of India v Satyawati Tandon
P. Kasilingam v P.S.G. College of Technology
Electrical Rengali Hydro Electric Project v Giridhari Sahu
Rajbir Surajbhan Singh v Institute of Banking Personnel Selection
Ramakrishna Mission v Kago Kunya
Writ petitions challenging trademark registration procedures must ensure procedural fairness, including issuance of notice and opportunity for affected parties to respond.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of exhausting alternative remedies provided by the Trade Marks Act before seeking relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of In....
Section 20 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 provides for advertisement of an application, either after acceptance or before acceptance, so as to afford an opportunity to the public, to oppose the registratio....
The Registrar must consistently apply relevant laws in trademark registration, ensuring procedural compliance, and cannot ignore third-party rights under the Trade Marks Act, allowing for comprehensi....
The trial court must assess only the prima facie tenability of claims regarding trademark validity under Section 124, without delving into the merits of those claims.
The court established that under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, a civil suit must be stayed if a rectification application regarding trademark validity is pending.
The court established that Senior Examiners can exercise quasi-judicial powers to reject Trade Mark applications if duly authorized, and must provide reasoned orders in compliance with statutory requ....
The court affirmed that not all amendments to a trademark application are substantial alterations; the amendment's nature must be assessed based on its impact on the original application.
The right to cancel a trademark under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act is independent of ongoing infringement suits and remains available for invocation regardless of related Section 124 implication....
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.