Can Third Parties Challenge Trade Marks _Before_ Advertisement? Madras HC says No – Only after publication* _Rajkumar Sabu v. Sabu Trade Private Ltd. & Anr._ W.P. (IPD) No. 34 of 2025 | W.M.P (IPD) No. 23 of 2025 | Madras High Court *1. The Legal Question* *Section 21, Trade Marks

[15/05, 11:13] sekarreporter1: https://www.mondaq.com/india/trademark/1786520/can-third-parties-challenge-trade-marks-before-advertisement-madras-high-court-weighs-in
[15/05, 11:13] Meta AI: *Can Third Parties Challenge Trade Marks _Before_ Advertisement? Madras HC says No – Only after publication*
_Rajkumar Sabu v. Sabu Trade Private Ltd. & Anr._
W.P. (IPD) No. 34 of 2025 | W.M.P (IPD) No. 23 of 2025 | Madras High Court

*1. The Legal Question*
*Section 21, Trade Marks Act, 1999*: _“Any person may, within four months from the advertisement or re-advertisement of the application, initiate opposition proceedings.”_

*Issue*: Can a third party request refusal/intervene _before_ the trademark is advertised in the Trade Marks Journal?

*2. Facts in _Rajkumar Sabu_ case*
1. *Petitioner*: Rajkumar Sabu sought a writ to quash the Registrar’s _“acceptance order”_ for a trademark application by Sabu Trade Pvt Ltd.
2. *Stage*: Application was accepted by Registrar but *not yet advertised*.
3. *Petitioner’s ask*: Call for Registrar’s records + quash acceptance before advertisement stage.

*3. Madras HC Ruling – 2026*
*Held*: Third parties *cannot* challenge/object at pre-advertisement stage.

*Reasoning*:
1. *Statutory scheme*: Trade Marks Act + Rules _“clearly demarcate the time and manner for third-party participation”_. Opposition is _“statutorily allowed only after the mark has been examined, accepted, and advertised in the Trade Marks Journal”_.
2. *No provision pre-advertisement*: _“There is no legal provision for hearing or entertaining objections at the pre-advertisement stage, and any attempt to do so would contravene the statutory scheme”_.
3. *Registrar’s discretion*: While Sec 19 gives Registrar power to withdraw acceptance, _“it is discretionary and vested solely in the Registrar. Crucially, the statute does not grant any third party the right to be heard in relation to the exercise of this power before advertisement and registration”_.
4. *Fee doesn’t create right*: Petitioner filed interlocutory petition in July 2021 citing Entry 15 of Schedule I + paid fee. Court: _“Paying a fee alone does not confer a right to the consideration of such petitions without statutory backing”_.

*4. Broader Process – When _Can_ Third Parties Object?*
1. *Formalities check* → *Examination* → *Acceptance* → *Advertisement in Trade Marks Journal* → *Opposition window opens*.
2. *Sec 21*: _“Any person”_ can oppose within *4 months* from advertisement.
3. *Pre-advertisement*: No right to intervene. Registrar examines on own + may consider examiner objections, but not third-party objections.

*5. Related HC Positions*
1. *Rejection at pre-advertisement*: If Registrar rejects application before advertisement, HC often sets aside and directs _“application shall proceed to advertisement”_, leaving it open to opponents. _“It is, however, made clear that this order will not be binding on opponents, if any”_.
2. *Interlocutory petitions*: In _SACHAMOTI_ case, HC held interlocutory petition at pre-advertisement stage had _“no statutory or procedural foundation”_.

*6. Key Takeaways for Brand Owners*
1. *No pre-emptive oppositions*: Competitors can’t file objections/letters of protest before your mark hits the Journal.
2. *Watch the Journal*: Opposition clock starts only from advertisement date – 4 months.
3. *Registrar’s gatekeeping*: Examination stage is between applicant + Registrar. Third-party evidence only comes in post-advertisement via formal opposition.
4. *Exception*: Registrar can suo motu withdraw acceptance under Sec 19, but third parties have no right to demand it or be heard.

*Bottom line*: Madras HC confirms India’s trademark system is binary – third parties get their say _only after advertisement_. Before that, you can’t challenge, oppose, or force the Registrar to hear you. Petitioner’s attempt to quash acceptance pre-advertisement failed.

*Citation*: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) – W.P. (IPD) No. 34/2025. Article: Mondaq, _“Can A Trade Mark Be Opposed In India Before It Is Advertised For Opposition?”_

Want the full judgment or checklist for monitoring Trade Marks Journal for your competitors?