Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed –Delhi High Court Affirms Registrability of Numeric Trademarks Under Indian Trademark Law
In a pivotal Judgement that could influence branding strategies across industries, the Delhi High Court has held that numeric trademarks, if arbitrary and distinctive, are eligible for registration under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The judgment was passed in the case of Vineet Kapur v. Registrar of Trade Marks, where the petitioner challenged the rejection of his application to register the number ‘2929’ as a trademark for cosmetic products falling under Class 3.
This decision has reinforced the legal recognition of numerical combinations as valid trademarks in India, provided they fulfill the fundamental criteria of distinctiveness and non-descriptiveness.
Case Background: Rejection of ‘2929’ Trademark
The matter arose when Vineet Kapur, the appellant, sought to register the trademark ‘2929’ for his range of cosmetic products. The application, filed under Class 3 of the Trade Marks Act, included goods such as soaps, shampoos, and beauty items. However, the Trade Marks Registry rejected the application, citing the mark’s lack of inherent distinctiveness. The Registrar concluded that the numerals used were too generic and incapable of serving as a source identifier.
Challenging this decision, Kapur filed an appeal under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, asserting that the number ‘2929’ was an arbitrary and coined combination, not associated with any characteristic of the goods and therefore eligible for protection.
Delhi High Court’s Judgement on Numeric Trademarks
Justice Mini Pushkarna, who delivered the judgment, held that numeric marks fall squarely within the definition of a “mark” under Section 2(1)(m) of the Trade Marks Act. The Court emphasized that there is no statutory bar against registering numbers as trademarks, so long as they possess the ability to distinguish the applicant’s goods or services from others in the market.
The Court ruled:
“A trademark cannot be refused registration merely because it consists of numbers. The determining factor is whether or not the numeral mark is devoid of distinctive character.”
The judgment adds significant value to the evolving interpretation of trademark distinctiveness in India, especially for marks that consist entirely of numerical characters.
Distinctiveness is Key: The Court’s Analysis
The Court agreed with the appellant’s argument that ‘2929’ was a coined term, created without any reference to the product’s features or composition. Since the number did not convey any descriptive or suggestive meaning related to cosmetic products, the Court concluded that it was inherently distinctive.
In assessing distinctiveness, the Court followed the global legal position that even numeric marks can acquire a secondary meaning when used consistently and prominently to indicate the origin of goods or services.
Supporting Precedents Cited by the Court
To reinforce its interpretation, the Delhi High Court cited a number of past Indian judgments that upheld numeric trademarks:
- Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd. v. Reward Soap Works, involving the mark ‘501’.
- Glossy Color & Paints v. Mona Aggarwal, regarding the registration of ‘1001’.
- Alphavector India v. Sach Industries, related to the mark ‘91’.
These decisions demonstrate that numbers can serve as valid trademarks when they are arbitrary, non-descriptive, and capable of distinguishing the goods.
Existing Trademark Registrations Strengthen the Case
A key observation by the Court was that the appellant already held multiple registered trademarks such as ‘9292’, ‘1010’, and ‘1111’, all for goods in Class 3. The Court noted that ‘2929’ aligned with the same branding pattern and was neither generic nor commonly used in the industry.
The Court also drew guidance from McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, a globally respected legal treatise, which supports the view that numerical combinations can function as trademarks if they are used consistently to signify the source of goods or services.
Final Directions by the Delhi High Court
Setting aside the Registrar’s refusal order dated February 2024, the Court directed that the application for trademark number 5151862 (‘2929’) be advertised in the Trade Marks Journal as per procedure.
However, the Court also clarified:
“The appellant shall not claim any exclusive right over the individual numerals ‘2’ and ‘9’. This judgment shall not prevent any third party from initiating opposition proceedings after publication.”
Additionally, the Court ordered that a copy of the judgment be sent to the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks for necessary compliance.
Legal Representation
- For the Appellant (Vineet Kapur): Advocates Vaibhav Vutts, Bijaharini G., Aamna Hasan, and Aarya Deshmukh.
- For the Trade Marks Registry: Central Government Standing Counsel Nidhi Raman, along with Advocates Zubin Singh and Arnav Mittal.
Implications of the Judgment for Businesses and Trademark Professionals
This judgment significantly clarifies the legal position on numerical trademarks in India, offering relief and direction to businesses that rely on numeric branding. Companies using numbers as part of their brand identity—be it for cosmetics, electronics, or other product categories—can now approach the Trade Marks Registry with greater confidence, provided their mark is arbitrary and uniquely associated with their goods or services.
For trademark consultants, IP lawyers, and brand managers, this decision is a key reference point in advising clients on the registrability of numeric marks and how to establish distinctiveness during the application process.
Read Meanwhile: Radico Khaitan India’s Leading IMFL Maker
FAQs on Numeric Trademarks and the Delhi High Court Judgment
1. What is a numeric trademark?
A numeric trademark is a brand identifier that consists entirely or primarily of numbers, such as “2929” or “501”. These marks are used to distinguish a company’s goods or services from others in the market.
2. Are numeric trademarks allowed under Indian law?
Yes. The Delhi High Court has ruled that numeric trademarks are eligible for registration under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, as long as they are arbitrary and distinctive in nature.
3. What was the case about the ‘2929’ trademark?
The case involved Vineet Kapur, who applied to register the mark ‘2929’ under Class 3 for cosmetics. The Trade Marks Registry rejected the application, but the Delhi High Court overturned this decision, Judgement that numeric marks can be registered if they are distinctive.
4. Why did the Registrar initially reject the ‘2929’ trademark application?
The Registrar claimed that the number ‘2929’ lacked distinctiveness and was made up of common numerals that could not be monopolized by a single trader.
5. What does the Trade Marks Act, 1999 say about numbers as trademarks?
Under Section 2(1)(m) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, a “mark” includes letters, numbers, words, or a combination thereof. Thus, numbers can be registered as trademarks if they meet the distinctiveness requirement.
6. What is meant by a “distinctive” trademark?
A distinctive trademark is one that uniquely identifies and distinguishes the goods or services of one business from those of others. In the case of numeric marks, distinctiveness means the number is arbitrary and not descriptive of the product.
7. What makes a numeric mark arbitrary or coined?
A numeric mark is considered arbitrary or coined when it is created without any direct connection to the product or its characteristics. For example, ‘2929’ has no obvious meaning or relation to cosmetics.
8. Can a numeric trademark be registered even if it’s just numbers?
Yes. The Delhi High Court confirmed that a mark made up only of numbers can be registered, provided it is not generic, commonplace, or lacking in distinctiveness.
9. What Indian cases support the registration of numeric trademarks?
Key cases include:
- Tata Oil Mills v. Reward Soap Works (501)
- Glossy Color & Paints v. Mona Aggarwal (1001)
- Alphavector India v. Sach Industries (91)
These judgments upheld the validity of numeric trademarks in India.
10. Does the owner of a numeric trademark get exclusive rights over individual digits?
No. In the ‘2929’ Judgement, the Court clearly stated that the applicant cannot claim exclusive rights over the individual digits ‘2’ or ‘9’—only the complete numeral combination is protected.
11. Will the ‘2929’ mark be automatically registered after the Court’s Judgement?
No. The Court directed that the application be advertised in the Trade Marks Journal, after which it may still be opposed by third parties during the opposition period.
12. Can a business use multiple numeric trademarks for branding?
Yes. In fact, Vineet Kapur already held trademarks for other numeric combinations like ‘9292’, ‘1010’, and ‘1111’. Businesses may adopt a series of numeric marks as long as each is distinctive.
13. What is the significance of this Judgement for businesses and brand owners?
This Judgement allows businesses to confidently adopt numeric branding strategies and file for trademark registration in India, knowing that arbitrary number-based marks can qualify for protection.
14. How can businesses ensure their numeric trademark is accepted?
To enhance the chances of registration:
- Use arbitrary or coined number combinations.
- Avoid numbers that are commonplace or descriptive.
- Show consistent use of the mark to build brand association.
- File the application with proper legal justification for distinctiveness.
15. Can numeric trademarks acquire distinctiveness over time?
Yes. Like wordmarks, numeric trademarks can acquire distinctiveness through use. If a number becomes associated with a particular brand over time, it may be considered inherently distinctive for registration.
Read Judgement: VINEET KAPUR versus REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS
Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed, Registration of Numeric Trademarks allowed
