IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3 of 2026 ==========================================================

ZOTA HELTHCARE LIMITED A COMPANY Versus EXAMINER OF TRADE MARKS, TRADE MARKS REGISTRY OFFICE ==========================================================

Appearance:

LD. ADVOCATE MR. TEJAS S. TRIVEDI with MR KALPESH C PATEL(5066)

for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR VIHARKUMAR H DESAI(13026) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS. PRERNA A BHANSALI(18621) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MS VYOMA K JHAVERI(6386) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA Date : 11/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. The present Civil Appeal is filed under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 challenging the order dated 09.10.2025 passed by Examiner of Trade Marks, Geographical Indication and Copyright, Ahmedabad.

2. Mr. Tejas S. Trivedi, Ld. Advocate for Kalpesh C. Patel, Ld. Advocate for appellant submits that the appellant had applied for the Trademark "Dava Bharat" under Class 35 being Application no. 6195705 on 24/11/2023. The Objection/Examination report u/s. 9(1)(a) was issued by Copyright, Ahmedabad on 05/12/2023. He further submits that detailed reply along with all supporting documents were Indication and Copyright, Ahmedabad on 08/12/2023. He states that without considering the reply the application under class 35 has been refused.

3. Ms. Vyoma Jhaveri, Ld. Advocate for respondent submits that the present trademark application has been refused under Section 9(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 on the ground that the impugned mark is non-distinctive in nature. It is further argued that the mark "davabharat" has been refused registration on the basis that it consists of two commonly used words, namely "DAVA" and "BHARAT", and, therefore, as stated in the Examination Report, the impugned order is passed as being non-distinctive.

4. Considering the submission of both parties it appears that the impugned order in non-speaking as to why the said reply of Appellant is not considered by the Examiner of Trade Marks, Geographical Indication and Copyright, Ahmedabad and thus it would be just and proper to quash and set-aside order dated 09/10/2025 and direct the respondent to re-hear and consider the reply of appellant and decide the application no. 6195705.

5. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.10.2025 passed by the respondent in respect of Trade Mark Application No. 6195705 for the mark "davabharat" in Class

35 is hereby quashed and set aside.

6. The matter is remanded back to the respondent-

Copyright, Ahmedabad, for fresh consideration from the stage of hearing. The respondent-Examiner of Trade Marks, Geographical Indication and Copyright, Ahmedabad shall thereafter conclude the hearing and pass a reasoned order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order, in accordance with law.

7. This Court has not entered into the merits of the case or expressed any opinion on merits as well as law. Therefore, the authority is directed to decide on merits without being influenced by this order independently and strictly in accordance with law.

8. The present appeal therefore stands partly allowed to the aforesaid extent.

(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)

NIHAL PATEL