TRADEMARK LAW AND BRAND PROTECTION IN INDIA

INTRODUCTION 

In a rapidly globalizing economy, brands have become some of the most valuable commercial assets. Consumers often prioritize brand identity over product features, making it crucial to protect brand reputation for both businesses and consumers. Trademarks, which symbolize source and quality, are central to this effort. In India, where counterfeiting and imitation are common, trademark law plays a vital role in maintaining business integrity, protecting consumers from deception, and keeping the market fair and competitive.  

This article looks at the legal framework for trademark protection in India, the role of trademarks in brand safety, and the practical challenges faced in enforcement. It also reviews significant recent cases that highlight changing judicial trends in trademark law.  

WHAT IS A TRADEMARK ?

Under section 2(1)(zb) of the Trade Marks Act 1999, a trademark is defined as:  

“a mark capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of others and may include the shape of goods, their packaging, and combination of colors.” 

Key provisions include:

• Statutory recognition and protection of both registered and unregistered marks. 
• Introduction of service marks, in addition to goods. 
• Provision for the registration of certification and collective marks.
• Prohibition of registration of misleading, generic, or offensive marks.
•  Protection for well-known marks, even if unregistered in India, and the concept of trans-border reputation. 

Hence, a trademark includes more than just words or logos; it may also involve shapes, sounds, colors, and even trade dress. Distinctiveness is essential in trademark law. It refers to how well a mark can distinguish one person’s goods or services from another’s. Marks can vary from inherently distinctive (like invented words such as Kodak) to descriptive or generic, which often require proof of secondary meaning.  

HOW TRADEMARKS HELP IN BRAND PROTECTION 

Trademarks perform several related functions:  

• Identification of Origin: They indicate the source, allowing consumers to connect a product to a specific manufacturer.  
• Quality Assurance: Consistent use builds trust in a certain quality standard.  
• Goodwill Protection: The mark represents the reputation and consumer loyalty that a brand develops over time.  
• Market Differentiation: In competitive fields such as FMCG, fashion, and technology, a strong trademark helps a brand stand out from imitators.  

By protecting these functions, trademark law defends businesses against unfair competition and shields consumers from deception.  

THE TRADEMARK REGISTRATION PROCESS :STEPS AND PRE-FILING CONSIDERATIONS 

Before filing, well-informed businesses carry out analyses to ascertain the existence of identical or similar trademarks. This is necessary to avoid collisions, opposition charges, or costly litigation. Such search can be conducted online at the Indian Trade Marks Registry.

Application and Examination

Trademark applications are to be filed before the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks, and this can be done either online or in person. It is important that the applicant states the class of goods/services concerned (the Indian system follows the NICE Classification system). Upon receipt of an application, the Registrar examines the application in respect of both formal and substantive requirements and in particular, absolute and relative grounds for refusal.

Publication and Opposition

Accepted applications are published in the Trade Marks Journal for a period of four months to allow opposition. Any third party may oppose the application perhaps on the ground of prior rights, similarity, non-distinctiveness, bad faith, and so forth. If no opposition is filed or if the opposition is disposed of in favor of the applicant, the mark goes ahead with registration. The opposition is by way of a quasi-judicial process which sometimes does result in delays-in-grant. 

Registration and Renewal

Upon successful completion of all the procedures, a certificate of registration is issued according to which the registration marks confer exclusive rights upon the owner for usage of that mark. Registrations last 10 years and have to be renewed eternally by paying the prescribed renewal fee- subject to use and not becoming generic.

THE CASE FOR REGISTRATION :BRAND IDENTITY AND OWNERSHIP

Getting a registered trademark in India is more than just a tick in the box, it is the real work of establishing the brand. You have the exclusive right to use and sell the goods or services under a registered trademark. Registration itself acts as a public notice informing others to refrain from infringements and offers a surefire remedy to combat any unauthorized use. 

One can always turn to protection afforded under the traditional passing-off laws; however, a registration would hold a superior place in any dispute and with the regulators.

PESTERING CHALLENGES:THE NEED FOR VIGILANCE 

Thus, notwithstanding a certain level of antitrust progress, there continue to be many hurdles faced by Indian trademark legislation: delays in opposition proceedings; differences in the ways courts practise their procedure; and continuing sophisticated infringement, particularly in the fields of pharmaceuticals and consumer goods. These issues, therefore, are being tackled by the legislature and the judiciary. Courts have begun to grant effective interim relief and damages in favour of the established brands.

WHY TRADEMARK PROTECTION IS NECESSARY IN INDIA 

 India has a unique environment for trademark law. With a growing digital market and a large informal economy, brand infringement is widespread and complex. Counterfeit products, unauthorized imports, domain name misuse, and keyword advertising disputes all pose challenges for enforcement.  

Counterfeiting is especially serious in areas such as luxury goods, consumer electronics, and pharmaceuticals. This issue can endanger consumer safety.E-commerce has intensified trademark misuse, where sellers mislead consumers by using similar or identical marks.  

Digital advertising has introduced complicated issues, especially regarding keyword bidding and the use of trademarks in comparative advertising.  

Transborder reputation has taken on greater significance as Indian courts often face disputes involving global brands that have limited direct business presence in India.  

 In this context, recent case law shows how Indian courts are trying to balance brand protection with market competition.  

 CASE STUDIES 

1. Pernod Ricard India Pvt Ltd v Karanveer Singh Chhabra (Supreme Court, August 2025)

Here, the Supreme Court considered whether using the name “PRIDE” on London Pride Whisky infringed the rights of Pernod Ricard in the mark Imperial Blue and its lead whisky Royal Stag Barrel Select Blenders Pride. The Court highlighted the anti-dissection rule that composite marks are to be considered as a whole rather than dissected into segments. 

The Court denied an injunction on the grounds that Pernod Ricard was not entitled to exclusive rights to the term “pride.” This judgment reflects judicial restraint in conferring rights over common or praise words, validating the requirement that trademark protection achieve a balance between exclusivity and competition in the market.

 2. Aditya Birla Fashion & Retail Ltd v Friends Inc (“Peter England”) (Delhi High Court, January 2025)

The Delhi High Court identified PETER ENGLAND as a famous trademark in India. The description assigns to the brand the highest level of protection in the Trade Marks Act, and even protects it from being used in other goods or services.

The Court relied on widespread use, reputation, and consumer recognition of the mark in India, observing that well-established brands require robust protection against dilution. The judgment brings India into compliance with international standards under the Paris Convention and TRIPS, offering superior protection for well-known brands.

 3. Ferrero v Unknown (“Nutella Well-Known Mark Case”)(Delhi High Court, July 2025)

The Delhi High Court also granted NUTELLA the status of a famous trademark in India following a case instituted by Ferrero. The Court verified Nutella’s long-established worldwide reputation and strong consumer connection even with limited distribution in certain regions of India.

 This recognition provides protection against dilution, blurring, and damage to the brand. It also reflects an emerging trend in the judiciary to recognize “well-known” status to internationally famous marks so that Indian consumers are not confused by imitations.

4. Daiwa Pharmaceutical v Daiwa Pharmaceuticals (Bombay High Court, April 2024)

Here, the Bombay High Court reexamined the concept of transborder reputation. The court held that even brands with minimal direct presence in India could enforce their rights if they demonstrated considerable international recognition and consumer familiarity in India.

 The Court observed that in today’s global world, brand reputation is transborder through advertising, web sales, and international media. But it emphasized that the claimants have to show substantial proof of recognition in India, not merely in the global context.

5. MakeMyTrip (India) Pvt Ltd v Booking.com BV and Google v DRS Logistics (P) Ltd(Delhi High Court, 2023–24)

Indian courts in such instances examined whether bidding on another company’s trademark as a Google Ads keyword constituted infringement. The Delhi High Court (Division Bench) in the MakeMyTrip v Booking.com case held that bidding on a competitor’s trademark as a keyword wasn’t necessarily infringement unless it resulted in confusion. 

In Google v DRS Logistics, the Court took this concept further, holding that intermediaries such as Google were not liable unless they explicitly misrepresented or advertised infringing ads.These cases reflect a great change in Indian law, consistent with EU trends (such as Google France v Louis Vuitton) in striking a balance between trademark rights and fair competition and advertising practices online.

POLICY AND REFORM DIMENSIONS 

While India’s trademark law has made considerable advances, several areas need attention:   

• Strengthening Intermediary Liability: As e-commerce grows, clear legal requirements for online platforms to detect and remove infringing listings are crucial.  
• Efficient Customs Recordal : While the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules 2007 allow for trademark recordal with Customs, real enforcement is still lacking.  
• Awareness and Enforcement: Small and medium enterprises often lack the resources to protect their marks, highlighting the need for institutional support.  
• Balancing Rights and Competition: Courts must continue to guard against overly broad monopolies, ensuring that common or descriptive terms stay available for public use.  

BEST PRACTICES FOR BRAND OWNERS :BUILDING A ROBUST PROTECTION STRATEGY 

• Early and Comprehensive Filing:Businesses should conduct thorough pre-launch searches and register all key branding elements, including logos, taglines, packaging, and domain names. Applications that cover future markets or possible sub-brands can reduce risks down the line.
• Monitoring, Audit, and Enforcement:Ongoing market monitoring, both in-person and online, is essential. Companies should carry out regular IP audits and employ third-party monitoring services to spot and address possible infringements or cybersquatting.
• Global Protection:For businesses with big goals, it’s a good idea to consider the Madrid Protocol early and to connect with major foreign IP offices such as USPTO and EUIPO to secure international rights alongside Indian protection.
• Internal Training and Documentation:Training employees and creating detailed internal guidelines for brand use can help prevent accidental dilution. This also strengthens future enforcement efforts by providing proof of consistent, genuine use.

CONCLUSION 

Trademark law in India has become a solid mechanism for protecting brands, balancing commercial rights with consumer interests. The legal landscape reflects a sophisticated approach, while courts robustly protect well-known marks (like Peter England and Nutella), they also resist monopolizing common terms (as with Pernod Ricard). The acknowledgment of transborder reputation (Daiwa) and clear guidelines on online advertising (MakeMyTrip, Google) show the law’s ability to adapt to modern challenges

As India strives to become a center for innovation and consumer markets, trademarks will remain crucial in shaping brand strategies. Better enforcement mechanisms, especially in the digital realm, will ensure that trademarks continue to protect both businesses and consumers in the future.

REFFERENCES

1. Trade Marks Act 1999, s 2(1)(zb)https://indiankanoon.org/doc/493060/
2. Pernod Ricard India Pvt Ltd v Karanveer Singh Chhabra (Supreme Court of India, 14 August 2025https://indiankanoon.org/doc/179600311/
3. Supreme Court junks Pernod Ricard’s plea against London Pride Whisky trademark, Economic Times (14 August 2025) https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-products/liquor/supreme-court-junks-pernod-ricards-plea-against-london-pride-whisky-trademark/articleshow/123307798.cms?from=mdr
4. Aditya Birla Fashion & Retail Ltd v Friends Inc (Delhi High Court, 9 January 2025) https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/02/10/delhi-hc-declares-peter-england-as-well-known-trade-mark/
5. Delhi High Court declares Peter England as a well-known trademark, ET LegalWorld (10 February2025)https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/02/10/delhi-hc-declares-peter-england-as-well-known-trade-mark/
6. Nutella gets well-known trademark status in India, Economic Times (23 July 2025) https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-products/food/nutella-gets-well-known-trademark-status-in-india-delhi-high-court-rules-in-ferreros-favour/articleshow/122978904.cms?from=mdr
7. Daiwa Pharmaceutical v Daiwa Pharmaceuticals (Bombay High Court, 16 April 2024) https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/INDBOM00000004449
8. MakeMyTrip (India) Pvt Ltd v Booking.com BV (Delhi High Court DB, 14 December 2023) https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-bookingcom-makemytrip-trademark-keyword-google-ads-program-244570
9. Google LLC v DRS Logistics (P) Ltd (Delhi High Court DB, 2024)https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/12/04/google-v-drs-the-subtle-victory-for-google-a-case-comment/