Disposed¶20

Cna International Inc. v. the Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Delhi HC12 May 2026W.C.(C)-IPD/20/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, IP Division, W.P.(C)-IPD 20/2026 & CM 126/2026, decided 12.05.2026 by Jyoti Singh, J. Keywords: RG-3 notice; trademark restoration and renewal; Registration No. 236748; Registrar of Trade Marks; Articles 226 and 227; dispatch details unavailable; fresh copy of RG-3 notice by post and e-mail; restoration steps in accordance with law; no opinion on merits; petition disposed of with pending application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.1 to send another copy of the RG-3 notice to the Petitioner at the address mentioned in the writ petition and through electronic mode on the e-mail ID in the memo of parties, followed by steps in accordance with law to restore/renew the trademark registration; writ petition disposed of along with pending application. ¶20

Cna International Inc. Vs the Registrar of Trade… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether Respondent No.1 can substantiate that the RG-3 notice in respect of trademark Registration No. 236748 was sent to the Petitioner. +1 more

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Directed Respondent No.1 to send another copy of the RG-3 notice to the Petitioner at the address mentioned in the writ petition and also through electronic mode on the e-mail ID furnished in the memo of parties, as it would be in the interest of justice given Respondent No.1's inability to substantiate dispatch of the original notice.

¶19

Key takeaways

After the fresh copy of the RG-3 notice is sent, steps will be taken in accordance with law to restore/renew the trademark registration.ratio¶19
The Court expressly clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C)-IPD 20/2026 & CM 126/2026) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by CNA International Inc. before the High Court of Delhi (Jyoti Singh, J.), seeking direction to the Registrar of Trade Marks to issue RG-3 notice in respect of trademark Registration No. 236748, accept renewal and restoration fees, and restore/reinstate the registration. Respondent No.1, by e-mail dated 11.05.2026, stated that the RG-3 notice was issued on 22.05.2018 vide Letter No. O3/2289312 but the dispatch number, acknowledgment number and date of dispatch are not available and cannot be obtained at this stage. Finding Respondent No.1 unable to substantiate that the RG-3 notice was sent to the Petitioner, the Court directed Respondent No.1 to send another copy of the RG-3 notice to the Petitioner at the address mentioned in the writ petition and through electronic mode on the e-mail ID furnished in the memo of parties, whereafter steps were to be taken in accordance with law to restore/renew the trademark registration. The Court expressly made clear that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits. Writ petition disposed of in these terms along with the pending application.

¶1

$~120

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C)-IPD 20/2026 & CM 126/2026

¶4

CNA INTERNATIONAL INC. .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Gaurav Miglani, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, CGSC with Mr. Naveen, GP.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 12.05.2026

¶12

This writ petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to Respondent No.1 to issue RG-3 notice in respect of trademark bearing Registration No. 236748 as also to accept the renewal and restoration fees from the Petitioner and restore and reinstate the said trademark registration.

¶13

Learned CGSC appearing for Respondent No. 1 hands over copy of e- mail dated 11.05.2026, wherein it is stated by Respondent No.1 that RG-3 notice was issued on 22.05.2018 vide Letter No. O3/2289312, however, the dispatch number, acknowledgment number and date of dispatch are not available. It is candidly submitted that these details cannot be obtained at this stage.

¶14

Considering the relief sought in the present petition and the stand of Respondent No.1 that it is unable to substantiate that the RG-3 notice was

¶15

W.P.(C)-IPD 20/2026

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:51:25

¶19

sent to the Petitioner, in my view, it would be in the interest of justice to direct Respondent No.1 to send another copy of the RG-3 notice to the Petitioner at the address mentioned in this writ petition as also through electronic mode on the e-mail ID furnished in the memo of parties. Thereafter, steps will be taken in accordance with law to restore/renew the trademark registration. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶20

Writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms along with pending application.

¶21

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶22

MAY 12, 2026 S.Sharma

¶23

W.P.(C)-IPD 20/2026

¶24

Page 2 of 2

¶25

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:51:25

Cna International Inc. v. the Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cna International Inc. v. the Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Resilient Innovations Private Limited Vs Digital Bharat Pay Aeps Private Limited and Ors.

Asana Biosciences Llc Vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Design

Jeetendra Kumar Agrahari Vs Ajay Kumar Jaiswal & Anr.

M/S S. K. Educations Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr. Madan Mohan Gupta & Anr.

Bentley Systems Inc. & Anr. Vs Aarvee Associates Architeests Engineers and Consultants Private Limited & Anr.

Mandeep Singh Vs Shabir Momin & Anr.