{"id":294968,"date":"2023-06-19T17:30:26","date_gmt":"2023-06-19T12:00:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=294968"},"modified":"2023-06-23T09:17:28","modified_gmt":"2023-06-23T03:47:28","slug":"cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/b> In a case wherein an appeal was filed under Section 91<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (‘Act’) challenging the order passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks (‘Registrar’), wherein the registration of the appellant's device mark ‘CruzOil’\/\"composite (‘subject mark’) was refused, a Single Judge Bench of Amit Bansal, J.<\/b> opined that ‘CruzOil’ being a composite mark was excluded from Section 9(1)(b)<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act<\/a> and was registrable. The Court allowed the appeal and thus, had set aside the impugned order.<\/p>\n

Background<\/b><\/p>\n

The appellant filed the subject application for registration of the subject mark in Class 4 and an examination report was issued by the Registrar raising objection under Section 9(1)(b) of the Act, on the ground that the mark consisted exclusively of words that might serve in the trade to designate the intended purpose of the goods. In 2023, the impugned order was passed refusing the subject application of the appellant. Thus, the appellant filed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the appellant submitted that the subject mark was completely arbitrary and did not relate to the goods i.e., industrial lubricants and therefore, the same was arbitrary and distinctive. Further, it was submitted that the word ‘CruzOil’ did not have any dictionary meaning and a device mark having combination of words and devices had to be considered as a whole for registration.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the respondent submitted that the grounds for refusal under Section 9(1)(b) of the Act were absolute and since the mark was descriptive and designated the kind and intended purpose of the goods, the Registrar had rightly refused the application.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/b><\/p>\n

The Court noted that the appellant had applied for registration of a composite device mark, which contained the word ‘CruzOil’, along with other elements, however, the impugned order proceeded on the basis that the subject mark was a word mark, ‘CruzOil’ and therefore, treated it as such.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that the mark having a combination of words and devices had to be considered as a whole for the purposes of grant of registration. The subject mark was a device mark which consisted of various unique and arbitrary elements, such as a tagline ‘Lifeline for Engines’, yellow background with two purple rings, unique pattern of semi circles with images of 4 stars on alternative sides with a pattern of slanting parallel lines.<\/p>\n

The Court relied on Abu Dhabi Global Market<\/i> v. Registrar of Trademarks, Delhi<\/i>, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 2947<\/a>, wherein a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had interpreted Section 9(1)(b) of the Act in respect of composite marks and opined that “composite marks ipso facto stand excluded from the scope of Section 9(1)(b) of the Act, even if part of such marks consist of marks or indications which serve, in trade, to designate the geographical origin of the goods or services in respect of which the mark was registered. The “dominant part” principle was alien to Section 9(1)(b). It could not co-exist with the “exclusivity” principle which finds statutory place in the provision. Section9(1)(b) used the word “exclusively”. The use of the word “exclusively” completely forecloses any argument predicated on the “dominant part” principle. It was only if the entire mark exclusively falls within one of the excepted categories envisaged by Section 9(1)(b) that the registration of the mark could be treated as statutorily proscribed”<\/i>.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court opined that the Registrar erred in dissecting the subject mark into its individual parts while considering registration.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that there were other composite marks containing the word ‘Cruz’ that had been registered under Class 4. The Court also noted that the appellant had given a disclaimer with regard to exclusive right to use the word ‘Oil’.<\/p>\n

The Court allowed the appeal and thus, had set aside the impugned order. Further, the Court directed the Trade Marks Registry to proceed with the advertisement of the subject application as per the proviso to Section 20 of the Act.<\/p>\n

[Navaid Khan v. Registrar of Trade Marks Office, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3273<\/a>, Order dated 30-5-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

ALSO READ:<\/b><\/p>\n

Words ‘Abu Dhabi Global Market’ used in a device mark are distinctive in nature: Delhi High Court Read Here<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Appellant: Kangan Roda, Sharad Besoya, Advocates;<\/p>\n

For the Respondent: Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC; Srish Kumar Mishra, Sagar Mehlawat, Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Advocate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The mark having a combination of words and devices had to be considered as a whole for the purposes of grant of registration.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":293503,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[58634,58635,2543,10851,2616,42104],"class_list":["post-294968","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-composite-mark","tag-crudoil","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-registration","tag-Trade_Mark","tag-trade-marks-act"],"yoast_head":"\n'CruzOil' being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act: Delhi HC | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that composite marks like 'CruzOil' were excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and were registrable.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that composite marks like 'CruzOil' were excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and were registrable.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-06-19T12:00:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-06-23T03:47:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"'CruzOil' being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act: Delhi HC | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-06-19T12:00:26+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-06-23T03:47:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court held that composite marks like 'CruzOil' were excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and were registrable.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"delhi high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"'CruzOil' being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act: Delhi HC | SCC Blog","description":"Delhi High Court held that composite marks like 'CruzOil' were excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and were registrable.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court","og_description":"Delhi High Court held that composite marks like 'CruzOil' were excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and were registrable.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-06-19T12:00:26+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-06-23T03:47:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/","name":"'CruzOil' being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act: Delhi HC | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2023-06-19T12:00:26+00:00","dateModified":"2023-06-23T03:47:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"Delhi High Court held that composite marks like 'CruzOil' were excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and were registrable.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"delhi high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/19\/cruzoil-being-composite-mark-is-excluded-from-section-91b-trade-marks-act-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018CruzOil\u2019 being a composite mark is excluded from Section 9(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act and is registrable: Delhi High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":292828,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/22\/words-abu-dhabi-global-market-used-in-device-mark-are-distinctive-in-nature-delhi-high-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":294968,"position":0},"title":"Words \u2018Abu Dhabi Global Market\u2019 used in a device mark are distinctive in nature: Delhi High Court","author":"Simranjeet","date":"May 22, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"So long as others do not use the mark, or any similar mark, the Delhi High Court opined that a finding of non-distinctiveness can ordinarily not be returned as, howsoever innocuous a mark may appear to be, if it is used only by one person, it would, in plain etymological\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281156,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/06\/marks-under-swiss-military-ineligible-trade-mark-registration-suggest-link-to-swiss-military-establishment-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":294968,"position":1},"title":"Delhi High Court | Marks under \u2018Swiss Military\u2019 ineligible for trade mark registration Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"January 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court allowed an appeal moved by the Armasuisse (Federal Agency of the Swiss Federation) and held that the marks \u2018white cross on black background\u2019, \u2018white cross on red background\u2019 and \u2018SWISS MILITARY\u2019 were all ineligible for trade mark registration in respect of textiles as it might suggest\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":340141,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/31\/bomhc-directs-registration-of-khadis-device-mark-prakritik-paint-for-cow-dung-paints\/","url_meta":{"origin":294968,"position":2},"title":"Bombay HC directs Registry to register Khadi\u2019s device mark \u201cPRAKRITIK PAINT\u201d in respect of cow dung based paints","author":"Simranjeet","date":"January 31, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"There is sufficient material on record to show that the petitioner is openly using the subject device mark in the context of its goods in the public domain and the Registrar completely ignored these documents while passing the impugned order.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Khadi device mark Prakritik paint","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Khadi-device-mark-Prakritik-paint.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Khadi-device-mark-Prakritik-paint.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Khadi-device-mark-Prakritik-paint.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Khadi-device-mark-Prakritik-paint.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":365423,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/31\/ker-hc-dismisses-plea-to-cancel-india-gate-trade-mark\/","url_meta":{"origin":294968,"position":3},"title":"Kerala High Court dismisses plea to cancel ‘INDIA GATE’ trade mark; clarifies jurisdiction is with Delhi HC","author":"Editor","date":"October 31, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe power of rectification is exercisable only by the High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction over the appropriate office of the Trade Marks Registry, wherein the entry relating to the impugned mark is made.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"INDIA GATE trade mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/INDIA-GATE-trade-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/INDIA-GATE-trade-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/INDIA-GATE-trade-mark.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/INDIA-GATE-trade-mark.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":300310,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/29\/composite-trade-marks-not-to-be-dissected-to-determine-deceptive-similarity-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":294968,"position":4},"title":"Composite trade marks not to be dissected to determine deceptive similarity, comparison to be made as a whole: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 29, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe plaintiff's mark and the defendants' mark are composite trade marks, which imply that they are a combination of different elements, and their registration willd not grant an exclusive right in the word \u2018d mart'.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":305066,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/17\/delhi-hc-refuses-to-stay-the-registration-for-the-mark-schezwan-chutney-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":294968,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court refuses to stay the registration for the mark \u2018SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY\u2019","author":"Editor","date":"October 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThis Court is not inclined to stay the impugned trade mark registration for the mark \u2018SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY\u2019. Moreover, the issue of jurisdiction of this Court would have to be considered first.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/294968","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=294968"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/294968\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/293503"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=294968"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=294968"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=294968"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}