Madras High Court
WP(IPD)/5/2026 of Good Drop Wine Cellars Private Limited Vs Office of the Controller Genera of Patents, Design on 5 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
WP(IPD) No. 5 of 2026 and WMP (IPD) No. 3 OF 2026
CNR: {HCMA010576252026}
Good Drop Wine Cellars Private Limited
501, Mount Unique Mount Mary road,
Bandra, Mumbai- 400 050.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Office of the Controller Genera of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks Office of the Trade Marks Registry, Intellectual Property Building, Bhoudhk Sampada Building, Shaikh Misree Marg, Dosti Acres, Antop Hill, Mumbai- 400 037.
2. The Registrar of Trademarks
Office of the Trademarks Registry,
Intellectual Property Building,
GST Road,Guindy,
Chennai- 032.
3. Vina Santa Carolina S.A
TIL-TIL, 2228, MACUL,SANTIAGO, CHILE
Having their address for service in India as Depenning and Depenning, Advocates, Alaknanda Building, 16, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-400 036.
..Respondent(s)
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st and / or 2nd respondent to dispose off the rectification filed by the petitioner and pending
before them under No. 269295 against the trademark registration under No.
1334766 in class 33 in accordance with law within a time bound manner and to pass.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. R.Sathish Kumar
For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Janarthanan
SPCGSC(SPC)
For R.1 and R.2
R.3 – No appearance
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Heard Mr.R.Sathish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Janarthanan, learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2. The third respondent, despite service of notice and name of the third respondent also being printed in today’s cause list, has neither chosen to appear in person nor through counsel.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s application for registration of Trade Mark was refused on the ground that the third respondent’s registration was already granted and therefore, the petitioner’s trade mark was refused by an order dated 02.01.2020. In order to cancel the trade mark issued to the third respondent, a rectification application has been filed by the petitioner on 21.09.2020 and the same is pending in Rectification Petition No. 269295. The grievance of the petitioner is that without passing any orders, the said application is pending which is impeding any further and consequential applications to be taken out by the petitioner in order to redress the genuine grievances of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel also brings to my notice that the third respondent, despite service of notice, has also not chosen to file any objections in the Rectification Petition and he has neither filed any counter, nor any evidence. It is the further contention of Mr.R.Sathish Kumar that another Trade Mark Application has now been filed which is pending with the Registry in Application No.6168922. The grievance and the apprehension of the petitioner is that the second trade mark application should also not suffer the same fate and delay, which the first application has suffered.
4. Hence a limited relief of expeditious disposal of the Rectification Application in No. 269295 against trade mark registration of the third respondent in No.1334766 has been sought for by issuance of a Writ of Mandamus.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 fairly states that if reasonable time is granted to the respondents 1 and 2, final orders will be passed in the Rectification Petition.
6. In view of the limited relief sought for and also taking into account that the contesting third respondent has not bothered to enter appearance, despite service of notice and also in view of the fact the application for rectification is pending from 21.09.2020, I am inclined to entertain this writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and writ of mandamus is issued to the second respondent to pass final orders on the petitioner’s rectification petition No.269295, after hearing the petitioner/counsel for the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks form the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. It is needless to state that subject to the final orders being passed in the said Rectification Petition No.269295, the second application for registration of trade mark No.6168922 shall be taken up thereafter and disposed of in accordance with law, preferably expeditiously. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 05-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SR
To
1. Office of the Controller Genera of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks Office of the Trade Marks Registry, Intellectual Property Building, Bhoudhk Sampada Building, Shaikh Misree Marg, Dosti Acres, Antop Hill, Mumbai- 400 037.
2. The Registrar of Trademarks Office of the Trademarks Registry, Intellectual Property Building, GST Road,Guindy, Chennai- 032.
3. Vina Santa Carolina S.A TIL-TIL, 2228, MACUL,SANTIAGO, CHILE Having their address for service in India as Depenning and Depenning, Advocates, Alaknanda Building, 16, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-400 036.
P.B.BALAJI, J. SR WP(IPD) No. 5 of 2026 05-10-2026