Insights

No Removal Without Notice: The MBD Case on Trademark Non-Renewal

The Delhi High Court held that a trademark cannot be struck off for non-renewal unless the Registrar first sends the statutory notice. Skip the notice, and the removal — and its deadlines — do not stand.

Published 11 March 2013 · Updated 13 August 2026 · Reviewed by Selvam & Selvam

Trademarks

A trademark cannot be quietly struck off for non-renewal — the Registrar must first send the proprietor the statutory notice. Skip that step, the Delhi High Court held, and the removal (and the deadlines that follow it) do not stand.

The case

  • Appellant: Union of India / Registrar of Trade Marks
  • Respondent: Malhotra Book Depot — mark “MBD”
  • Court: Delhi High Court (Chief Justice D. Murugesan and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw)

Facts: MBD was registered in 1970 and renewed in 1977. Years later, incoming partners seeking a legal-use certificate discovered the registration had been removed for non-renewal — without notice. Their October 2010 restoration application was rejected as beyond the one-year window. A Single Judge ordered restoration in November 2011; this appeal followed.

The statutory scheme

  • Section 25 — the Registrar “shall send notice in the prescribed manner” before removing a mark for non-payment of renewal.
  • Section 26 — even after removal for non-payment, the mark is deemed to remain on the register for one year for the purpose of later applications.

What the court held

The court held that duration, renewal and restoration are interlinked, and that notice to the proprietor is mandatory. Crucially, a failure to follow the removal procedure invalidates the subsequent deadlines — you cannot count a one-year restoration clock from a removal that was never validly effected.

Why it matters (and the loose ends)

  • The notice is a substantive protection, not a formality — removal without it is defective.
  • Deadlines flow from valid removal. If the removal itself was improper, the one-year restoration limit does not cleanly apply.
  • The ruling left open questions around applications beyond the one-year window and errors in counsel notification — grey areas worth watching.

This sits alongside the O-3 notice requirement — the reminder the Registrar must send before expiry. See our insight on the O-3 notice and the renewal and restoration guide.

Practical guidance

  • Do not rely on the Registry’s notice alone — diarise renewals independently and keep your address for service and email current.
  • If a mark was removed without notice, that defect is a live argument for restoration, even outside the ordinary window.

Frequently asked questions

Can a trademark be removed for non-renewal without notice in India? No. Section 25 requires the Registrar to send notice before removal; the Delhi High Court in the MBD case held this mandatory.

What is the effect of removal without notice? The removal is defective, and the deadlines flowing from it (such as the one-year restoration window) do not straightforwardly apply.

How long does a mark stay “deemed” registered after removal? Under Section 26, one year after removal for non-payment, for the purpose of later applications.

What should proprietors do? Track renewals independently, keep contact details current, and, if removed without notice, raise that defect when seeking restoration.

Useful official resources