Under the 2017 Rules, you cannot get an extension of time to file evidence in a trademark opposition — miss the two-month window and the opposition is abandoned. The Delhi High Court confirmed in Sun Pharma v. Dabur that this was a deliberate change, not an oversight.
The change the Rules made
The Trade Marks Rules, 2002 expressly allowed extensions of time at the evidence stage of opposition (through Rules 50, 51 and 52), permitting extensions “not exceeding one month in aggregate, upon request.”
The Trade Mark Rules, 2017 — in the corresponding Rules 45, 46 and 47 — dropped that language entirely. That silence created uncertainty: were extensions still available at the Registrar’s discretion, or gone?
What the court held
In Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Dabur India Ltd. & Anr. (C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 146/2022), the Delhi High Court held the omission was intentional. The move from the 2002 to the 2017 Rules reflected “a deliberate effort to eliminate delays by removing the Registrar’s discretionary powers.”
The practical consequence under Rule 45: failing to file evidence within the two-month period results in the opposition being abandoned — there is no extension provision to fall back on.
The gap between practice and rule
Despite the rules’ silence, registrars had continued granting extensions at their discretion after 2017. The court’s reasoning signals that this practice contradicts the legislative intent to impose strict, non-extendable timelines — so parties should not rely on it.
What it means for you
- Treat the two-month evidence deadline as hard. Plan filings assuming no extension is available.
- Do not bank on registry practice. Extensions granted informally may not survive scrutiny under this ruling.
- Front-load your evidence. Assemble affidavits and documents early so the window is never at risk.
Frequently asked questions
Can I get an extension to file evidence in a trademark opposition in India? Under the 2017 Rules, no. The Delhi High Court in Sun Pharma v. Dabur held the removal of the extension provision was deliberate.
What happens if I miss the evidence deadline? Failing to file within the two-month period under Rule 45 results in the opposition being abandoned.
Why did the 2017 Rules remove extensions? To eliminate delays by removing the Registrar’s discretionary power to extend the evidence-stage timelines.
Registrars still grant extensions — can I rely on that? Risky. The court’s reasoning suggests such extensions contradict the legislative intent, so they may not hold up.
Useful official resources
- The Trade Marks Act, 1999
- IP India trademark e-filing portal