Spicyip iconSpicyipSep 29, 2026

Can Section 124 be Invoked in Section 47 Cancellation Proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999?

The interplay between trademark infringement proceedings and non-use cancellation proceedings under Sections 47 and 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 raises a deceptively simple question: can a Section 47 proceeding trigger a stay of an infringement suit? With the Calcutta and Delhi High Courts taking divergent approaches, Arushi Bisht and Snehal Singh examine the statutory and practical implications of treating "rectification proceedings" under Section 124 as encompassing non-use cancellation proceedings.

Can Section 124 be Invoked in Section 47 Cancellation Proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999?

Share this story

Send the public story page.

Useful takeaways from this story.

The interplay between trademark infringement proceedings and non-use cancellation proceedings under Sections 47 and 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 raises a deceptively simple question: can a Section 47...

With the Calcutta and Delhi High Courts taking divergent approaches, Arushi Bisht and Snehal Singh examine the statutory and practical implications of treating "rectification proceedings" under Section 124...

Arushi Bisht is an Intellectual Property Attorney with four […]

Building the complete brief

The page is ready to read now. The fuller skim-friendly version will appear here automatically.

The useful part

The interplay between trademark infringement proceedings and non-use cancellation proceedings under Sections 47 and 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 raises a deceptively simple question: can a Section 47 proceeding trigger a stay of an infringement suit? With the Calcutta and Delhi High Courts taking divergent approaches, Arushi Bisht and Snehal Singh examine the statutory and practical implications of treating "rectification proceedings" under Section 124 as encompassing non-use cancellation proceedings. Arushi Bisht is an Intellectual Property Attorney with four […]

Details worth keeping

The interplay between trademark infringement proceedings and non-use cancellation proceedings under Sections 47 and 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 raises a deceptively simple question: can a Section 47 proceeding trigger a stay of an infringement suit? With the Calcutta and Delhi High Courts taking divergent approaches, Arushi Bisht and Snehal Singh examine the statutory and practical implications of treating "rectification proceedings" under Section 124 as encompassing non-use cancellation proceedings. Arushi Bisht is an Intellectual Property Attorney with four […]

Keep reading in the app

Open the app view to save this story, compare related coverage, and continue from the same source.

Open in app