In a key ruling, the Rajasthan High Court has declared that a registered trademark cannot be removed from the Trade Marks Register without issuing a mandatory notice under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The Court criticized the Registrar of Trademarks for removing a mark without serving Notice O-3, as required under Rule 58 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017.
⚖️ What the Court Said
Justice Uma Shanker Vyas held that:
- Issuing notice is mandatory before deleting any trademark.
- Even if a renewal application is not filed, removal cannot happen without prior warning.
- The Registrar’s duty is to comply with Section 25(3) and Rule 58.
The Court concluded that failure to issue Notice O-3 violates the rights of trademark holders. It set aside the removal and ordered the restoration of the trademark.
📌 Case Background
The petitioner held a valid trademark that had expired over seven years ago. However, they did not receive any notice from the Registry before the mark was deleted.
The Registrar acted unilaterally, without following the legal process. This prompted the petitioner to challenge the move in court.
📘 Legal Position: Section 25 and Rule 58
- Section 25(1): Trademark registration is valid for ten years.
- Section 25(3): Registrar must serve notice before removal if renewal is not filed.
- Rule 58: Requires the issuance of Notice O-3 at least one month before expiry.
If the Registrar skips this process, the removal becomes illegal. This ruling follows the precedent set by the Bombay High Court in a similar case.
⚠️ Disclaimer:
This article is for informational purposes only. It is based on official legal documents and public court records. It does not constitute legal advice. Please consult an intellectual property lawyer for case-specific guidance.