Delhi High Court Sets Aside Registry Order Reviving Abandoned Trademark Opposition

The Delhi High Court has set aside a Trade Marks Registry order that revived a trademark opposition after the opponent failed to file evidence within the prescribed two-month period

Justice Tejas Karia held that the Registry could not use its review powers to extend the deadline for filing evidence after the opposition had already stood abandoned.

KEI Industries had opposed Kumar Equipments' application for the mark “KEI-KUMAR EQUIPMENT INDIA”, claiming it was similar to its registered “KEI” trademark. However, it failed to file evidence or notify the Registry of its intention to rely on the facts in its opposition within two months of receiving the counter-statement.

The court found that the counter-statement had been served on KEI Industries' attorney. It rejected the company's claim of non-receipt, noting that it had not produced an affidavit from its former lawyer to support it.

The Court also held that the Registry could not use its review powers to give KEI Industries another opportunity to file evidence.

Rejecting KEI Industries' argument that abandonment of its opposition could not automatically lead to registration, the Court referred to Section 23(1) of the Act. It held that once an opposition stands abandoned, no opposition remains for adjudication and the accepted and advertised application must proceed to registration.

The court clarified that it had not examined whether the rival marks were deceptively similar. KEI Industries remained free to pursue rectification proceedings under Section 57 of the Act.

The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the review order, and restored the abandonment order and Kumar Equipments' trademark registration.