Zepto, the name that has become synonymous with instant grocery deliveries, has been on a rapid rise. With its presence in multiple cities, millions of customers, and an aggressive branding strategy, it seemed like nothing could slow down its expansion. But when it came to securing its trade mark in ๐๐น๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ฏ๐ฑ (๐๐ฑ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด, ๐ฅ๐ฒ๐๐ฎ๐ถ๐น & ๐ช๐ต๐ผ๐น๐ฒ๐๐ฎ๐น๐ฒ ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐), Zepto hit an unexpected roadblock.
Someone had beaten them to it.
A pre-existing trade mark for ‘Zepto’ had been registered back in 2011 by an individual, effectively blocking Zepto’s ability to claim the name in this category. For any company, this could have been a serious setback. But instead of giving up, Zepto took a closer look at the law—and found its way through.
๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฃ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ก๐ผ๐ป-๐จ๐๐ฒ
A trade mark is meant to be used, not just owned. If a mark sits idle without being put to actual commercial use, the law allows for its ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐บ๐ผ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ณ๐ฟ๐ผ๐บ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ด๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ. Zepto, after conducting investigations, realized that the registered proprietor had never actively used the mark for any real business in ๐๐น๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ฏ๐ฑ.
With this in hand, Zepto took the matter to the ๐๐ฒ๐น๐ต๐ถ ๐๐ถ๐ด๐ต ๐๐ผ๐๐ฟ๐, filing a rectification petition.
The registered trade mark owner failed to appear in court, did not file a response, and had no evidence of ever using the mark in connection with the claimed services. The court, after reviewing the evidence, ruled in Zepto’s favor, ordering the removal of the old registration. The trade mark that had once been an obstacle was now gone.
๐ช๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ง๐ต๐ถ๐ ๐ ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ป๐
For Zepto, this decision clears the path for them to secure their mark in Class 35, solidifying their branding and business expansion.
For businesses and trade mark owners, it’s a reminder—๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ด๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฎ ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ ๐บ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ธ ๐ถ๐๐ป’๐ ๐ฒ๐ป๐ผ๐๐ด๐ต. ๐๐ณ ๐๐ผ๐ ๐ฑ๐ผ๐ป’๐ ๐๐๐ฒ ๐ถ๐, ๐๐ผ๐ ๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ธ ๐น๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ถ๐.
For law students and IP enthusiasts, this case is a perfect example of how trade mark law plays out in real-world business conflicts. A brand doesn’t just need protection; it needs strategy, persistence, and the right legal approach.
And for those watching the fast-paced world of intellectual property, Zepto vs. Zepto is another fascinating chapter in the ongoing evolution of brand protection in India.
๐ฆ๐๐ฎ๐ ๐๐๐ป๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ถ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐๐ ๐ณ๐ฟ๐ผ๐บ mentblue-news.
๐๐๐ฑ๐ด๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ - https://lnkd.in/guC8w-eu
mentblue mentblue-news
The Supreme Courtโs May 13, 2025 judgment has fundamentally revised the process for designating Senior Advocates, moving away from a rigid points-based system and placing greater value on holistic qualities central to the legal profession.
In a highly unusual development, the Supreme Court has ordered liquidation of Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. even after the resolution plan was approved, the amount paid, and implementation had commenced-an extraordinary outcome almost never witnessed under Indiaโs insolvency regime. The Courtโs decision to set aside JSW Steelโs resolution plan underscores that gross violations of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be cured by mere payment or partial ...
Letโs consider a startup working on prototypes that are both aesthetically crafted and functionally driven, with innovators eager to protect their creations. While copyright is often the go-to protection for creative works, a dilemma arises under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act. This provision withdraws copyright from certain works once they are commercially reproduced, unless protected under the Designs Act. In Cryogas v. Inox, the Supreme Court attem...