What a trade mark is
A trade mark is a sign that tells buyers whose goods or services they are looking at. The Trade Marks Act, 1999 defines it as a mark capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of others.[2]
Unlike a patent or a copyright, a registered trade mark has no fixed end date: registration is renewable every ten years.[2]
Distinctive
A mark that is "devoid of any distinctive character" cannot be registered, unless it has acquired distinctiveness through use before the filing date.[2]
Not confusing
A mark is refused if it is likely to confuse the public with an earlier mark, including by association.[2]
Tied to use
A registration can be cancelled for non-use. A continuous period of five years without bona fide use is a ground (s.47).[2]
The legal framework
The Trade Marks Act, 1999 is administered by the Registrar of Trade Marks under the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks. The text I read is stated to be current to 1 June 2026.[2]
| Provision | What it says |
|---|---|
| s.2(1)(zb) | Definition of "trade mark". |
| s.2(1)(zg), s.11(6)-(9) | A "well known trade mark" is one recognised by a substantial segment of the public using those goods or services, so that use on other goods or services would be linked to its owner. Indian use, registration or filing cannot be required to establish it. |
| s.9 | Absolute grounds for refusal: no distinctive character, and marks likely to deceive the public or cause confusion. The proviso saves marks that gained distinctiveness through use, or are well known, before the filing date. |
| s.11 | Relative grounds: conflict with earlier marks, including likelihood of confusion by association. |
| s.18, s.23 | A person claiming to own a mark used or proposed to be used applies in writing to the Registrar (s.18). On acceptance and the end of any opposition the mark is registered, and s.23(1) dates it from the filing date. |
| s.25 | Registration lasts ten years and is renewable for further ten-year periods. |
| s.28 | A valid registration gives the exclusive right to use the mark for the registered goods or services, subject to conditions and limits. |
| s.29 | Infringement: unauthorised trade use of an identical or deceptively similar mark for registered goods or services. Confusion is presumed where mark and goods are both identical (s.29(3)). Reputed marks are protected against dilution on dissimilar goods (s.29(4)). |
| s.30 | Limits: honest use that identifies goods as the proprietor’s, and resale of lawfully acquired goods. |
| s.34 | Continuous prior use from a date before the proprietor’s first use or registration is preserved. |
| s.47 | Removal for non-use: no bona fide intention to use, or five years of continuous non-use, with an excuse for special trade circumstances. |
How confusion is judged
Whether two marks are deceptively similar is decided on the facts. In Cadila Healthcare v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals (Supreme Court, 26 March 2001), a dispute between two malaria drugs, the Court looked at the factors below.[4]
The marks
Whether they are words, labels or composites, and how far they resemble each other in sound and idea.
The goods
Their nature, performance and character, and how they are bought.
The buyers
Their intelligence, education and the care they are likely to take.
Special risk
For medicines the Court held that confusion is a public-health matter, since many buyers do not read English or are illiterate, and that sale through trained professionals does not rule it out.
How a mark is registered
Applications go to the Trade Marks Registry. The 2017 Rules set the stages and fees; the fees below are from a 2017 summary and may have changed, so check the current schedule before filing.[3]
- SearchLook for earlier identical or similar marks for the same goods or services before you invest in a name.Avoid s.11 conflicts
- FileForm TM-A to the Registrar. The 2017 fee was INR 4,500 for individuals, small enterprises and start-ups and INR 9,000 for others, filed electronically.[3]2017 fee, check now
- ExaminationThe Registrar examines the mark under sections 9 and 11. The 2017 summary says objections must be answered within a month of receipt.[3]Hearing if refused
- Publication and oppositionAn accepted mark is advertised in the Trade Marks Journal. Others have four months to oppose (Form TM-O, INR 2,000 in 2017).[3]Opposition window
- Registration and renewalThe mark is registered from the filing date. Renewal (Form TM-R, INR 9,000 in 2017) is due every ten years.[3]s.25
Registration is not the only protection. Courts also protect goodwill in an unregistered mark through the action of passing off. I did not research this point for this page, so read it as general background.
The numbers
Trade marks are by far the busiest of the four registers. The annual report for 2024-25 gives these totals.[1]
Trade mark applications, 2024-25
Number of applications or marks. Source: IP India Annual Report 2024-25.
The report counts filings, examinations, registrations and disposals as separate flows, so they do not add up within the year. I did not reconcile them, and the report gives a different disposal figure (88,885 post-examination disposals) in a later chapter.[1]
What this page does not cover
- Sections 103 and 135 (offences and reliefs). The copy of the Act I read ended at section 50.[2]
- Collective and certification marks, and international registration.
- Current fees and forms. The fees shown are from 2017.
- The 2023 and 2026 amendments to the Act, which I could not read in detail.
References
Links are pages I opened while building this page. Where a source is a law-firm or explainer article rather than the Act itself, it is labelled secondary.
- IP India Annual Report 2024-25. ipindia.gov.in. Chapter I, section 5 and chapter VI.
- The Trade Marks Act, 1999. India Code (PDF). Sections 2, 9, 11, 18, 23, 25, 28, 29, 30, 34, 47 read. Stated to be current to 1 June 2026.
- Ready reckoner on filing trade marks under the 2017 Rules. SCC Online. secondary 2017 fees and timelines.
- Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals, 2001 (2) PTC 541 (SC). Summary at iPleaders. secondary The summary is inconsistent about which company owned which drug name, so I did not name them.