Madras High Court Dismisses RPG Enterprises' Plea To Cancel RPG Marble Trademark, Citing 15-Year Acquiescence

The court observed that the company sat on its rights for nearly fifteen years after learning of the mark and is therefore barred by the doctrine of acquiescence.

Justice K. Kumaresh Babu delivered the judgment on September 28, dismissing the petition filed by RPG Enterprises Limited against the Registrar of Trademarks and RPG Marble Pvt. Ltd., along with the Bangalore company's directors.

RPG Enterprises, which says it has used the "RPG" mark since 1979 and holds numerous registrations built around the name, sought cancellation of the mark, granted to RPG Marble in Class 42 in 2006.

They argued that the mark wholly reproduced its trademark and was likely to cause confusion.

RPG Marble's counsel countered that "RPG" was independently coined from the initials of its directors, Rajkumar Laddha, Pawan Kumar Gupta and Giriraj Ladha, and that the mark has been in honest, continuous use since 2000 in a business entirely unrelated to RPG Enterprises' operations.

Relying on the Supreme Court's decision on acquiescence in Union of India v. N. Murugesan (2022), which describes acquiescence as "a tacit or passive acceptance" inferred from a party's knowledge combined with its failure to object within a reasonable period, the court held that RPG Enterprises' fifteen years of inaction after acquiring knowledge in 2002 "constitutes acquiescence."

It held the petition "squarely hit by the principles of acquiescence" under Section 33 of the Act, and on that finding alone, decided the remaining issues did not need to be examined in detail.

The Transfer Original Petition was accordingly dismissed, with the connected miscellaneous application closed and no order as to costs.

For RPG Enterprises: Advocate V.Aswini Anjana

For Respondents: A.R.Sakthivel SPC – CGSC for R1; Advocate Ramesh Ganapathy for R2 to R6