{"id":376098,"date":"2026-02-19T11:00:21","date_gmt":"2026-02-19T05:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=376098"},"modified":"2026-02-23T17:35:24","modified_gmt":"2026-02-23T12:05:24","slug":"mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/","title":{"rendered":"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn’t justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens’ trade mark application by Registrar"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Madras High Court:<\/span> While hearing an appeal filed under Section 91<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (‘Trade Marks Act’), against the order of the Registrar of Trade Marks deeming abandoned the application for registration of MODERN KITCHENS’ trade mark, a Single Judge Bench of N. Anand Venkatesh, J.<\/span>, set aside the impugned order and held that the affidavit of evidence filed on 01-06-2020 was within time and the later signed and attested affidavit was only a formal rectification. The Court further observed that Rule 46(2) of the Trade Mark Rules, 2017<\/a> (‘Trade Mark Rules’), to the extent it provides for deemed abandonment, is ultra vires the Act. Accordingly, the Registrar of Trade Marks was directed to consider the application on merits.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

The appellant, engaged in the manufacturing and production of packaged snacks and ready-to-eat food products under the brand “MODERN KITCHENS’ Delite in Every Bite” \"\", filed an application for registration of its mark in Class 35 on 03-12-2018, claiming use since 1984. The application was published in the Trade Marks Journal dated 02-09-2019 for third-party opposition. On 12-12-2019, the application was opposed, and the appellant filed its counter statement on 07-02-2020. The affidavit of evidence in support of opposition was filed on 06-04-2020, and due to the Covid pandemic, the appellant filed its affidavit of evidence on 01-06-2020 without signature or attestation, undertaking to file a signed version later.<\/p>\n

The proceedings thereafter went into hibernation until the appellant revived them by filing an interlocutory application on 08-10-2024, accompanied by a signed and attested affidavit, since the earlier authorised signatory had passed away. The Registrar, however, dismissed the interlocutory application and declared the application abandoned. The appellant contended that the affidavit filed in 2020 was within time and that Rule 46(2) of the Trade Mark Rules, which provides for deemed abandonment, is ultra vires the Trade Marks Act. The respondents argued that strict timelines must be adhered to, and failure to comply results in deemed abandonment. They maintained that the Registrar acted strictly in accordance with the Trade Marks Act and Trade Mark Rules.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision:<\/h3>\n

The Court emphasised that the affidavit filed on 01-06-2020, though unsigned and unattested, was during the peak of the Covid pandemic, and the appellant had clearly intended to prosecute the application. It was observed that the respondent had filed a reply affidavit in 2020, which showed that the affidavit of evidence was acted upon.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that procedural provisions should not be interpreted with rigidity to the extent of defeating the substantive rights vested in the parties. The Court noted that considering the fact that such filing of affidavit of evidence falls within the realm of procedure, pedantic interpretation should not be deployed, thereby defeating the substantive rights of the appellant.<\/p>\n

The Court highlighted that Section 21(4)<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act<\/a> does not provide for deemed abandonment for failure to file evidence, unlike Section 21(2)<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act<\/a>. It was further observed that Rule 46(2) of the Trade Mark Rules, to the extent it provides for deemed abandonment, goes beyond the scope of the Act and is ultra vires.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that a careful reading of Sub Rule (1) of Rule 46 of the Trade Mark Rules requires the applicant to file the affidavit of evidence within two months or inform the Registrar if no evidence is intended, and under Sub Rule (2) the consequence provided is deemed abandonment of the application. It was noted that on a plain reading, Sub Rule (2) goes beyond the scope of Section 21<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act<\/a>, since Section 21(2) alone prescribes when an application will be deemed abandoned, and Sub Section (4) consciously does not provide for such consequence, making Sub Rule (2) to that extent ultra vires.<\/p>\n

The Court further emphasised that by reading down Sub Rule (2), the only consequence of non-compliance would be deemed abandonment of letting in evidence, while the substantive right to prosecute the application would remain intact, thereby balancing the rights of the parties and addressing the consequence of non-compliance.<\/p>\n

The Court remarked that the affidavit filed in 2024 was only a formal rectification of the earlier affidavit, with the same contents, duly signed and attested. It was emphasised that the affidavit of evidence must be taken as filed on 01-06-2020, and therefore, there was no question of deemed abandonment.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, the Court held that the order dated 04-07-2025 was unsustainable. Accordingly, the order was set aside, and a direction was issued to the Registrar to proceed further with the application strictly in accordance with law, after affording opportunities to both parties, and to pass final orders within six months.<\/p>\n

The Court thus allowed the appeal, with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n

[ACE Foods (P) Ltd. v. Registrar of Trade Marks Office, 2026 SCC OnLine Mad 1210<\/a>, decided on 10-02-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

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

For the Appellant:<\/span> Rajesh Ramanathan<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> M. Karthikeyan, Standing counsel, Gladys Daniel and Somnath De<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Procedural provisions should not be interpreted with rigidity to the extent of defeating the substantive rights vested in the parties.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67537,"featured_media":376103,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[99092,99091,27643,61617,2567,11611,2769,32234,99093,83606,52951],"class_list":["post-376098","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-abandonment-of-application","tag-affidavit-of-evidence","tag-intellectual-property","tag-justice-n-anand-venkatesh","tag-Madras_High_Court","tag-principles-of-natural-justice","tag-relief","tag-remedies","tag-rule-462-ultra-vires","tag-trade-mark-registration","tag-trade-marks-act-1999"],"yoast_head":"\nMad HC: Procedural lapse not ground for abandoning Modern Kitchens' trade mark| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Madras High Court sets aside abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application; holds procedural affidavit lapse cannot defeat substantive rights.\" \/>\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\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn't justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application by Registrar\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Madras High Court sets aside abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application; holds procedural affidavit lapse cannot defeat substantive rights.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-02-19T05:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-02-23T12:05:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.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=\"Soumya Yadav\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn't justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application by Registrar\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Soumya Yadav\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 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\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/\",\"name\":\"Mad HC: Procedural lapse not ground for abandoning Modern Kitchens' trade mark| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-02-19T05:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-02-23T12:05:24+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/352812a68de79340babca39b2fea18c7\"},\"description\":\"Madras High Court sets aside abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application; holds procedural affidavit lapse cannot defeat substantive rights.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Modern Kitchens' trade mark\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn’t justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens’ trade mark application by Registrar\"}]},{\"@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\/352812a68de79340babca39b2fea18c7\",\"name\":\"Soumya Yadav\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2363aa3509ea5744057dbee913f279c33e94e40e89a96de9ff58ec27fde9881d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2363aa3509ea5744057dbee913f279c33e94e40e89a96de9ff58ec27fde9881d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Soumya Yadav\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/soumya\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mad HC: Procedural lapse not ground for abandoning Modern Kitchens' trade mark| SCC Times","description":"Madras High Court sets aside abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application; holds procedural affidavit lapse cannot defeat substantive rights.","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\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn't justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application by Registrar","og_description":"Madras High Court sets aside abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application; holds procedural affidavit lapse cannot defeat substantive rights.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-02-19T05:30:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-02-23T12:05:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Soumya Yadav","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn't justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application by Registrar","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Soumya Yadav","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/","name":"Mad HC: Procedural lapse not ground for abandoning Modern Kitchens' trade mark| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp","datePublished":"2026-02-19T05:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2026-02-23T12:05:24+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/352812a68de79340babca39b2fea18c7"},"description":"Madras High Court sets aside abandonment of Modern Kitchens' trade mark application; holds procedural affidavit lapse cannot defeat substantive rights.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Modern Kitchens' trade mark"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/mad-hc-procedural-lapse-not-ground-for-abandoning-modern-kitchens-trade-mark\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Madras HC: Procedural irregularity in affidavit filing doesn’t justify abandonment of Modern Kitchens’ trade mark application by Registrar"}]},{"@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\/352812a68de79340babca39b2fea18c7","name":"Soumya Yadav","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2363aa3509ea5744057dbee913f279c33e94e40e89a96de9ff58ec27fde9881d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2363aa3509ea5744057dbee913f279c33e94e40e89a96de9ff58ec27fde9881d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Soumya Yadav"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/soumya\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Modern-Kitchens-trade-mark.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":371945,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/madras-hc-fresh-not-frozen-deceptively-similar-fresh-n-frozen\/","url_meta":{"origin":376098,"position":0},"title":"Madras HC finds “Fresh Not Frozen” deceptively similar to “Fresh N Frozen”; Upholds rejection of trademark application","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"January 7, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is not what meaning is being assigned by the words chosen by the appellant, but the determining factor is whether it is deceptively similar.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Fresh Not Frozen deceptively similar","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Fresh-Not-Frozen-deceptively-similar.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Fresh-Not-Frozen-deceptively-similar.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Fresh-Not-Frozen-deceptively-similar.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Fresh-Not-Frozen-deceptively-similar.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":374406,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/02\/madras-hc-unilateral-cancellation-of-registered-trade-mark-illegal\/","url_meta":{"origin":376098,"position":1},"title":"Unilateral cancellation of registered trade mark by Registrar Without Rectification Proceedings is illegal: Madras High Court","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"February 2, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIf this certificate has to be cancelled for any reason, the appellant ought to have been put on notice and an opportunity must have been given to the appellant, failing which, such cancellation will be construed as a nullity in the eye of law.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"cancellation of registered trade mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/cancellation-of-registered-trade-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/cancellation-of-registered-trade-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/cancellation-of-registered-trade-mark.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/cancellation-of-registered-trade-mark.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":300063,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/25\/time-limit-file-counter-statement-notice-of-opposition-run-from-date-e-mail-madras-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":376098,"position":2},"title":"Limitation period to file counter statement to notice of opposition would run from date of receipt of e-mail: Madras High Court","author":"Apoorva","date":"August 25, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to re-consider and decide the matter on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity to both the parties","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":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":376098,"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":378610,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/17\/mad-hc-ayyappan-brand-rectification-minor-alterations-do-not-affect-trade-marks-identity\/","url_meta":{"origin":376098,"position":4},"title":"\u2018Minor alterations do not affect trade mark\u2019s identity\u2019; Madras High Court rejects rectification plea against \u201cAyyappan Brand\u201d trade mark","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"March 17, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe earlier invoices contain a pictorial depiction of Lord Ayyappa, which does not tally with the pictorial depiction in the registered mark.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"minor alterations do not affect trade mark's identity","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/minor-alterations-do-not-affect-trade-marks-identity.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/minor-alterations-do-not-affect-trade-marks-identity.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/minor-alterations-do-not-affect-trade-marks-identity.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/minor-alterations-do-not-affect-trade-marks-identity.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":311660,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/18\/marks-removal-for-non-use-requires-clear-unequivocal-evidence-of-abandonment-dhc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":376098,"position":5},"title":"\u2018Mark\u2019s removal for non-use requires clear, unequivocal evidence of abandonment\u2019; Delhi High Court dismisses application for removal of mark \u2018BAOJI\u2019","author":"Editor","date":"January 18, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cSection 47 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 serves to protect the integrity of the trade mark register by ensuring that registered marks that are not actively used in commerce are removed.\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\/376098","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\/67537"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=376098"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/376098\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/376103"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=376098"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=376098"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=376098"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}