What Is Chutiyaram Trademark Controversy?
In a bizarre turn of events, the Trade Marks Registry has reversed its decision to grant a trademark for the word Chutiyaram, just two weeks after its initial approval. The mark, applied for under Class 30 covering snacks and biscuits, was first accepted but later deemed to have been approved “in error.” Now, a hearing has been scheduled to determine its fate, adding another chapter to India’s most offbeat trademark battle.
On March 4, the Trade Marks Registry gave the green light to Chutiyaram, reasoning that it was a combination of two arbitrary words—Chuti and Ram. The examiner concluded that since the term bore no direct reference to the applied goods—namkeen and biscuits—it was distinctive enough to warrant approval. No one had appeared for four scheduled hearings, but the registry went ahead and accepted it, waiving objections under Section 9(1) of the Trade Marks Act.
But just a day after Chutiyaram was published in the Trademark Journal, eyebrows were raised. Experts questioned how a potentially offensive term slipped through, especially given that Section 9(2)(c) of the Act explicitly bars trademarks that are “scandalous, obscene, or contrary to public morality.”
Trademark law in India is strict when it comes to words that could be deemed offensive. Section 9(2)(c) prohibits the registration of trademarks that are vulgar, offensive, or inappropriate for public sensibilities. This means that any brand attempting to push the boundaries with edgy or controversial names must ensure they comply with legal and ethical norms.
Once a trademark is marked as “Accepted & Advertised,” it means the application has passed the initial examination stage and has been published for public scrutiny. But in this case, the approval sparked immediate backlash, prompting authorities to reconsider their decision.
On March 19, in an abrupt reversal, the Trade Marks Registry issued an order withdrawing its previous acceptance, stating, “The above-mentioned application has been accepted through an error. The registration of the mark is open to objection as it does not meet the criteria for registration under Section 9/11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.”
The order further cited Section 19 of the Act, which allows the Registrar to withdraw acceptance if a mistake is identified post-approval. A hearing has now been scheduled, and if the applicant fails to appear, the acceptance will be automatically withdrawn.
This controversy highlights the complexities of trademark approval in India. While examiners look for distinctiveness, they also need to ensure compliance with moral and legal standards. The Chutiyaram case raises questions about the review process—how did a potentially offensive term make it past multiple screenings? And why was it only retracted after public scrutiny?
