'Why Not Chutiyaram?': Namkeen Brand Applicant Blames 'Reckless Media Trial' For Trademark Registry's U-Turn

The Trademark Registry had accepted the application for registration of the mark ‘CHUTIYARAM’ under Class 30 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. However, on March 18, it was withdrawn, citing an error.

Trademark Registry had initially approved the mark 'Chutiyaram' for a namkeen brand, but withdrew it later citing an error.

Source : Pexels

The namkeen (snack) brand applicant who had sought the registration of the mark 'Chutiyaram' has blamed the "reckless media trial" as the reason behind the Trademark Registry's withdrawal of the approved trademark.

The Trademark Registry had recently approved the trademark, but later withdrew it saying that the mark's registration was accepted due to an error. 

A report by Bar and Bench said that the applicant Sadhna Goswami had filed a written response before the Trademark Registry over its withdrawal of approval, stating that it was driven by media pressure and a "systemic bias against Hindi and vernacular languages".

She accused media outlets of conducting a "reckless media trial" against the approved trademark, which she said led to the  registry's withdrawal of the mark citing an error was a direct result of media pressure.

"Media outlets wrongfully sensationalized the acceptance of the Mark despite the registry’s well-reasoned acceptance, various media organizations launched a targeted and unjustified campaign against the mark’s approval," Goswami's response said.

The Trademark Registry had initially accepted the application for registration of the mark ‘Chutiyaram’ under Class 30 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. However, on March 18, it withdrew the acceptance, citing an error. 

The order noted the mark was open to objections under Sections 9 and 11 of the Act, prompting a proposed withdrawal under Section 19, with a hearing scheduled.

Applicant Urges Registry To Function Without 'External Pressure'

The applicant's lawyer Anil Yadav shared the response on LinkedIn, stating that the term 'Chutiyaram' is made of two separate words: "Chutiya' [derived from Sanskrit word 'Choti,' meaning a sacred tuft of hair in Hinduism] and 'Ram' [referring to Lord Rama, a revered deity in Hindu tradition]."

"The term 'CHUTIYARAM चुटियाराम' in its entirety, therefore, conveys a deeply spiritual and cultural essence. It is not a slang term or an offensive expression but rather a respectful reference to sacred Hindu traditions," the applicant has said.

The examiner had initially deemed ‘Chutiyaram’ a combination of arbitrary words and found it distinctive, with no direct reference to goods like namkeen and biscuits. But concerns arose over its approval under Section 9(2)(c), which prohibits scandalous or obscene trademark. Nevertheless, it was accepted despite no representation in four hearing, the Bar and Bench report said.

The response stated that the withdrawal undermines the legal sanctity of the trademark application process and that the Registry, which is an autonomous statutory body, "should function independently without bowing to external pressures". 

The applicant also pointed out at the absence of a module for Hindi word marks in the digital filing system as a result of which the applicants have to transliterate their marks into English.

"The Registry’s continued insistence on English as the primary language for word mark applications reflects a colonial hangover," the applicant contended.

'Why Not Chutiyaram?'

Goswami, in the response, also highlighted that the registry had previously approved trademarks such as 'Boob', 'Lauda', and 'Pussy in Boots', "which could be subjectively perceived offensive".

It was contended that the "inconsistent treatment" of 'Chutiyaram चुटियाराम' violates the principle of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.

The applicant further requested the registrar to reinstate the acceptance of the trademark 'Chutiyaram चुटियाराम' and "recognise that the withdrawal was influenced by media pressure and was not based on legal grounds".

The applicant also urged the registrar to "address systemic biases against Hindi and vernacular languages in the trademark registration process" and uphold the sanctity of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 to ensure further decision are "free from external interference".