{"id":350789,"date":"2025-06-17T14:00:37","date_gmt":"2025-06-17T08:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=350789"},"modified":"2025-06-24T09:37:53","modified_gmt":"2025-06-24T04:07:53","slug":"bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/","title":{"rendered":"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> In the present petition, Manish Pitale<\/span>, J., dealt with the issue of refusal to register the trade mark \u2018WR\u2019 to the petitioner, Yamaha Hatsudoki Kabushiki Kaisha (\u2018Yamaha\u2019) by the Registrar\/Examiner of Trade Marks (the \u2018respondent\u2019). The Registrar cited similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019 and stated that there would be a likelihood of confusion in the minds of public between the trade mark of Yamaha, of which the registration was sought, and similar trade marks already on the register. The Court quashed the cryptic order by the Registrar and directed him to advertise the application before acceptance as per Section 20(1)<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019).<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

Yamaha Company, founded on 1-7-1955, was one of the leading manufacturers of motorcycles and marine products and the second largest in the motorcycles sales in the world. It had achieved distinctiveness globally in its name and brand Yamaha. It used various trade marks and \u2018WR\u2019 was one of them. It first adopted the said trade mark in August 1990 in respect of two-wheeler and three-wheeler products, parts and accessories and had sold its products bearing the same mark in 131 countries since then.<\/p>\n

Yamaha wanted to launch a WR bike range and therefore applied for the same in 2018 with the Registrar in class 12. The Registrar, however, stated that the mark of Honda Motor Company Ltd. i.e. \u2018WR-V\u2019 was already registered in class 12 itself as a conflicting mark and by the impugned order dated 20-5-2021, refused to accept the application by invoking Section 11(1)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. The Registrar stated that allowing the registration of the same would create confusion in the minds of the people as it was not distinguishable from the cited mark \u2018WR-V\u2019 to which Yamaha said that \u2018WR\u2019 was associated only with bikes and three-wheelers whereas \u2018WR-V\u2019 was a car by Honda.<\/p>\n

Yamaha also emphasized that it had obtained the registration of the said trade mark in several international jurisdictions like United States, European Union, Australia, New Zealand and Japan and that the mark was being used by it since 1990 and that the consumers in India were also familiar with their products. The Registrar contended that the impugned order correctly referred to Section 11(1) and therefore it should not be set aside.<\/p>\n

Analysis:<\/h3>\n

The Court considered the material on record and observed that at a bare perusal of the two marks would show that there was certainly a possibility of confusion as alleged by the Registar and that Yamaha failed to demonstrate why Section 11(1)<\/a> of the Act<\/a> could not be invoked in the present case. But it was not an unknown phenomenon that even identical or similar trade marks could exist on the register and the claim of international reputation of Yamaha spilling over to India would also need to be acknowledged.<\/p>\n

The Court also highlighted that Section 20<\/a> of the Act<\/a> indicated the options available to the Registrar when an application for registration was filed and the proviso to Section 20(1) laid down an exception to the general rule wherein a trade mark could be advertised even before acceptance. Keeping in mind the prior use in international jurisdictions, the registration obtained for the subject mark \u2018WR\u2019 in such territorial jurisdictions, the fact that motorcycles of Yamaha bearing the trade mark \u2018WR\u2019 were being sold in a number of foreign countries and the claim of the petitioner alleging that both the marks were concurrently being used in international jurisdictions, the Court determined that these factors certainly satisfied the requirements of the aforementioned proviso creating a special circumstance in favour of Yamaha and directed the Registrar to advertise the application before acceptance and thereafter proceed in accordance with law.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court set aside the impugned order of the Registrar holding that the authority could have a passed a more \u201cdetailed and well-reasoned order\u201d and directed the Registrar to take appropriate action as directed by the Court, within two weeks from the date of judgment.<\/p>\n

[Yamaha Hatsudoki Kabushiki Kaisha v. Registrar, Trade Marks, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2332<\/a>, decided on 13-6-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

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

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Darius Dalal a\/w Disha Mehta i\/by Jehangir Gulabbhai & Bilimoria & Daruwalla.<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Abhishek Bhadang a\/w Gauri Raghuwanshi; Pranjal Sharma, Examiner of Trade Marks GI & Copyright, present.<\/p>\n

Buy Trade Marks Act, 1999 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"trade<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Acknowledging the principle of territoriality, prior use in international jurisdictions, the registration obtained for the subject mark ‘WR’ in such territorial jurisdictions and other relevant materials produced by Yamaha, the Court directed fresh review of the application.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":314919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2569,83473,83603,67752,83607,83605,2616,83606,83604,83601,83602],"class_list":["post-350789","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-commercial-miscellaneous-petition","tag-honda","tag-justice-manish-pitale","tag-section-11-trade-marks-act","tag-section-20-trade-marks-act","tag-Trade_Mark","tag-trade-mark-registration","tag-wr-v-mark","tag-yamaha","tag-yamaha-hatsudoki-kabushiki-kaisha"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC quashes order denying WR trade mark to Yamaha | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court sets aside the Registrar\u2019s cryptic order refusing WR trade mark to Yamaha citing similarity with Honda\u2019s WR-V.\" \/>\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\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court sets aside the Registrar\u2019s cryptic order refusing WR trade mark to Yamaha citing similarity with Honda\u2019s WR-V.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-06-17T08:30:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-06-24T04:07:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\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\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC quashes order denying WR trade mark to Yamaha | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-17T08:30:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-24T04:07:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court sets aside the Registrar\u2019s cryptic order refusing WR trade mark to Yamaha citing similarity with Honda\u2019s WR-V.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019\"}]},{\"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC quashes order denying WR trade mark to Yamaha | SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court sets aside the Registrar\u2019s cryptic order refusing WR trade mark to Yamaha citing similarity with Honda\u2019s WR-V.","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\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019","og_description":"Bombay High Court sets aside the Registrar\u2019s cryptic order refusing WR trade mark to Yamaha citing similarity with Honda\u2019s WR-V.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-06-17T08:30:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-06-24T04:07:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/","name":"Bom HC quashes order denying WR trade mark to Yamaha | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-06-17T08:30:37+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-24T04:07:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Bombay High Court sets aside the Registrar\u2019s cryptic order refusing WR trade mark to Yamaha citing similarity with Honda\u2019s WR-V.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/17\/bomhc-quashes-order-rejecting-wr-trade-mark-to-yamaha\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bombay HC quashes order refusing \u2018WR\u2019 trade mark to Yamaha for similarity with Honda\u2019s \u2018WR-V\u2019"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":352720,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/08\/legal-roundup-intellectual-property-right-roundup-june-2025-copyright-infringement-trade-mark-infringement-scc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":350789,"position":0},"title":"INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ROUNDUP: A quick recap of the latest Intellectual Property Rights rulings from June 2025.","author":"Editor","date":"July 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Covering all the important intellectual property rights cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, latest legal updates in intellectual property rights and links to other roundups.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Intellectual Property Rights Roundup June 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Roundup-June-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"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":350789,"position":1},"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":350599,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/13\/bom-hc-refuse-well-known-mark-status-to-tiktok\/","url_meta":{"origin":350789,"position":2},"title":"No well-known mark status to \u2018TikTok\u2019: Inside Bombay High Court Ruling","author":"Editor","date":"June 13, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The mark \u2018TikTok\u2019 is already a registered trade mark in India and enjoys all statutory protection available under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, but its inclusion in the list of well-known marks, will obviously give added protection to a mark.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":308650,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/07\/madras-hc-directs-registrar-cancel-registration-granted-to-khoday-breweries-red-and-white-similar-to-well-known-mark-godfrey-phillips\/","url_meta":{"origin":350789,"position":3},"title":"Madras HC directs Registrar to cancel trade mark registration granted to Khoday breweries for \u2018Red and White\u2019, being similar to well-known mark of Godfrey Phillips","author":"Apoorva","date":"December 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201conce it is concluded that the earlier trade mark is a well-known trade mark, the registration of an identical or similar trade mark is not permitted if the use of the later mark without due cause would take unfair advantage of or be detrimental to the distinctive character or reputation\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"madras high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-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\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":357936,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/delhi-hc-registration-of-mankinds-petkind-mark\/","url_meta":{"origin":350789,"position":4},"title":"\u2018Suffix \u2018KIND\u2019 has amassed significant goodwill by Mankind\u2019: Delhi High Court sets aside order refusing registration of Mankind\u2019s \u2018PETKIND\u2019 mark","author":"Editor","date":"August 26, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\"Likelihood of confusion is not to be easily presumed. The nature of the goods and the class of their purchasers has to be borne in mind.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Registration of Mankind's 'PETKIND' mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Registration-of-Mankinds-PETKIND-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Registration-of-Mankinds-PETKIND-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Registration-of-Mankinds-PETKIND-mark.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Registration-of-Mankinds-PETKIND-mark.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":362035,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/29\/del-hc-grants-relief-to-crocs-in-trade-mark-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":350789,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court grants relief to CROCS in trade mark dispute; cancels registration of \u2018CROOSE\u2019 mark","author":"Editor","date":"September 29, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The petitioner company Crocs is a popular footwear brand with a widespread range of more than 300 styled for men, women and children which are popular both in India and abroad.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"relief to Crocs case","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/relief-to-Crocs-case.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/relief-to-Crocs-case.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/relief-to-Crocs-case.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/relief-to-Crocs-case.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/350789","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=350789"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/350789\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=350789"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=350789"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=350789"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}