{"id":26745,"date":"2026-07-06T06:02:15","date_gmt":"2026-07-06T06:02:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=26745"},"modified":"2026-07-06T06:05:06","modified_gmt":"2026-07-06T06:05:06","slug":"trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h1 id=\"h-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-v-tosiba-appliances-co-supreme-court-judgment-on-trademark-non-use-and-rectification-in-india\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Kabushiki_Kaisha_Toshiba_v_Tosiba_Appliances_Co_%E2%80%93_Supreme_Court_Judgment_on_Trademark_Non-Use_and_Rectification_in_India\"><\/span>Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. \u2013 Supreme Court Judgment on Trademark Non-Use and Rectification in India<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h1>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-introduction\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. is a significant judgement in Indian trademark law dealing with the removal of trademarks from the register on the ground of non-use and the scope of the powers exercised by authorities under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The case involved the globally renowned trademark \u201cTOSHIBA\u201d and raised important questions regarding whether a registered trademark can be removed from the register merely because it has not been actively used in India for a prolonged period.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_85 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Kabushiki_Kaisha_Toshiba_v_Tosiba_Appliances_Co_%E2%80%93_Supreme_Court_Judgment_on_Trademark_Non-Use_and_Rectification_in_India\" >Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. \u2013 Supreme Court Judgment on Trademark Non-Use and Rectification in India<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-2' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Factual_and_Procedural_Background\" >Factual and Procedural Background<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Dispute_Before_the_Court\" >Dispute Before the Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Appellants_Contentions\" >Appellant&#8217;s Contentions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Respondents_Contentions\" >Respondent&#8217;s Contentions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Issues_for_Determination_by_the_Court\" >Issues for Determination by the Court<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Reasoning_and_Analysis_of_the_Court\" >Reasoning and Analysis of the Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Distinction_Between_Section_461a_and_Section_461_b\" >Distinction Between Section 46(1)(a) and Section 46(1) (b)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Bona_Fide_Intention_to_Use_and_Prevention_of_Trademark_Trafficking\" >Bona Fide Intention to Use and Prevention of Trademark Trafficking<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Concept_of_%E2%80%9CPerson_Aggrieved%E2%80%9D_and_Locus_Standi\" >Concept of \u201cPerson Aggrieved\u201d and Locus Standi<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Authorities_on_Intermittent_Use_and_Non-Use_of_Trademarks\" >Authorities on Intermittent Use and Non-Use of Trademarks<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Exercise_of_Discretion_and_Balancing_of_Equities\" >Exercise of Discretion and Balancing of Equities<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Final_Decision_of_the_Court\" >Final Decision of the Court<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Point_of_Law_Settled\" >Point of Law Settled<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#Case_Details\" >Case Details<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The judgement is particularly important for multinational corporations, trademark owners, intellectual property practitioners, and businesses seeking to protect valuable brand assets in India. It clarifies the distinction between different grounds for rectification of trademarks, explains the concept of a \u201cperson aggrieved&#8221;, and highlights the discretionary nature of rectification proceedings. The ruling also demonstrates how courts must balance the rights of a registered proprietor against the interests of competitors seeking removal of a trademark from the register.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The decision remains an important authority on trademark non-use, rectification proceedings, trademark trafficking, bona fide intention to use, and the protection of internationally recognised marks under Indian law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-factual-and-procedural-background\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Factual_and_Procedural_Background\"><\/span>Factual and Procedural Background<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The appellant, Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba, a globally recognised Japanese corporation, had obtained registration of the trademark \u201cTOSHIBA\u201d in India as early as 1971 in respect of certain goods, including washing machines and spin dryers. The registrations were renewed periodically and continued to remain valid. The trademark was an invented and distinctive mark enjoying substantial international reputation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The respondent, Tosiba Appliances Co., subsequently adopted and used the mark \u201cTOSIBA\u201d in relation to certain products falling under Classes 7 and 11 of the classification schedule under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The respondent sought rectification of the register by filing proceedings under Sections 46 and 56 of the Act, contending that the appellant had not used the trademark in India for a long period and that the registration should therefore be removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Deputy Registrar accepted the respondent\u2019s objections and directed removal of the registration in relation to certain goods. The appellant challenged that decision before the High Court. A learned single judge substantially upheld the rectification proceedings, finding that there had been no bona fide use of the trademark in relation to the goods concerned. The Division Bench affirmed the decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Aggrieved by the adverse findings, the appellant approached the Supreme Court seeking restoration of its trademark registration and reversal of the rectification orders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-dispute-before-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dispute_Before_the_Court\"><\/span>Dispute Before the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The central dispute before the Supreme Court revolved around whether the trademark \u201cTOSHIBA\u201d was liable to be removed from the register on account of alleged non-use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-appellant-s-contentions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Appellants_Contentions\"><\/span>Appellant&#8217;s Contentions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The appellant argued that its registration was validly obtained, continuously renewed, and associated with a globally reputed trademark. It contended that there had never been any intention to abandon the mark. According to the appellant, various circumstances, including restrictions affecting the manufacture and marketing of certain products in India, explained the limited use of the trademark. The appellant further argued that the respondent was not genuinely affected and therefore lacked sufficient grounds to seek removal of the registration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-respondent-s-contentions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Respondents_Contentions\"><\/span>Respondent&#8217;s Contentions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The respondent contended that the appellant had not used the trademark in India for decades in relation to washing machines and spin dryers. It argued that trademark law does not permit a proprietor to indefinitely retain registrations without actual commercial use. According to the respondent, the registration had become vulnerable to removal under Section 46 of the Act because of prolonged non-use.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-issues-for-determination-by-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Issues_for_Determination_by_the_Court\"><\/span>Issues for Determination by the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court was therefore required to determine the scope of Sections 46 and 56 of the Act, the meaning of bona fide intention to use, the significance of non-use, and whether the respondent qualified as a \u201cperson aggrieved\u201d capable of maintaining rectification proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-reasoning-and-analysis-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Reasoning_and_Analysis_of_the_Court\"><\/span>Reasoning and Analysis of the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court undertook an extensive examination of the scheme of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The Court observed that the Act constitutes a complete code governing registration, use, rectification, assignment, and protection of trademarks. It noted that the appellant\u2019s registration had originally been granted in 1971 and had remained on the register through successive renewals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court analysed Section 46, which permits removal of a trademark on grounds of non-use. Particular attention was paid to clauses (a) and (b) of Section 46(1). The Court held that the two provisions operate in distinct fields and are not cumulative. A rectification applicant may rely on either provision independently depending upon the factual circumstances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-distinction-between-section-46-1-a-and-section-46-1-b\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Distinction_Between_Section_461a_and_Section_461_b\"><\/span>Distinction Between Section 46(1)(a) and Section 46(1) (b)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court explained that Section 46(1)(a) applies where registration was obtained without any bona fide intention to use the trademark and where no bona fide use has in fact occurred. Both elements must coexist. Section 46(1)(b), on the other hand, addresses situations where a continuous period of five years or more has elapsed during which there has been no bona fide use of the trademark. The court emphasised that the two provisions serve different legislative purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the absence of an intention to abandon a trademark automatically establishes a bona fide intention to use. It held that the concepts of intention to abandon and bona fide intention to use are distinct and cannot be conflated. Section 46(3), which provides protection where non-use results from special circumstances in trade, was held applicable only to cases under Section 46(1)(b) and not to cases falling under Section 46(1)(a).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">While discussing the statutory framework, the court relied upon American Home Products Corporation v. Mac Laboratories Pvt. Ltd and Another, AIR 1986 SC 137, where the distinction between clauses (a) and (b) of Section 46 had been clearly explained. The Court reproduced and endorsed the principle that once the period contemplated under Section 46(1)(b) has elapsed, the original intention to use the trademark becomes irrelevant unless the proprietor can invoke the protection available under Section 46(3).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-bona-fide-intention-to-use-and-prevention-of-trademark-trafficking\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Bona_Fide_Intention_to_Use_and_Prevention_of_Trademark_Trafficking\"><\/span>Bona Fide Intention to Use and Prevention of Trademark Trafficking<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court further observed that trademark registration confers valuable statutory rights. Trademark law seeks to prevent trafficking in trademarks and discourages proprietors from obtaining registrations merely to block others from using marks without any genuine commercial intention. The requirement of bona fide intention to use is therefore central to the statutory scheme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-concept-of-person-aggrieved-and-locus-standi\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Concept_of_%E2%80%9CPerson_Aggrieved%E2%80%9D_and_Locus_Standi\"><\/span>Concept of \u201cPerson Aggrieved\u201d and Locus Standi<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">An important issue concerned the meaning of the expression \u201cperson aggrieved&#8221;. The Court referred extensively to Hardie Trading Ltd v. Addisons Paint &amp; Chemicals Ltd, 2003 (27) PTC 241 (SC). It noted that the phrase has different connotations under Sections 46 and 56. Proceedings under Section 56 involve maintenance of the purity of the register and therefore require a liberal approach to locus standi. Proceedings under Section 46 are more closely linked to private commercial interests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court accepted that the respondent was a person aggrieved because it was engaged in trade, used the mark &#8220;TOSHIBA&#8221;, and had received legal threats from the appellant. Therefore, the respondent had sufficient commercial interest to maintain rectification proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-authorities-on-intermittent-use-and-non-use-of-trademarks\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Authorities_on_Intermittent_Use_and_Non-Use_of_Trademarks\"><\/span>Authorities on Intermittent Use and Non-Use of Trademarks<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court also considered several authorities on intermittent use and non-use of trademarks, including Plaza Chemical Industries v. Kohinoor Chemicals Co. Ltd., AIR 1975 Bom 191, Express Bottlers Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Pepsico Inc., Bali Trade Mark (1966 RPC 387 and 1968 RPC 426), and Bulova Trade Mark (1967 (9) RPC 229). These decisions were referred to while examining circumstances where intermittent use may protect a registration from removal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-exercise-of-discretion-and-balancing-of-equities\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Exercise_of_Discretion_and_Balancing_of_Equities\"><\/span>Exercise of Discretion and Balancing of Equities<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A crucial aspect of the judgement concerned the exercise of discretion. The Court noted that despite limited evidence of actual use in India, the appellant had maintained registrations, established service centres across India, entered into collaborations, supplied products, and actively sought to protect its trademark rights. The Court observed that the appellant\u2019s conduct demonstrated a continuing interest in preserving and enforcing its rights rather than abandoning the trademark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court also noted findings that the respondent itself never intended to manufacture washing machines or spin dryers. Therefore, removing the appellant\u2019s registration would not serve any meaningful commercial purpose for the respondent. The Court stressed that trademark law should balance competing interests and avoid causing unnecessary prejudice to either side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court further emphasised the exceptional reputation of the \u201cTOSHIBA\u201d mark, describing it as an invented word enjoying substantial recognition. It acknowledged that \u201cTOSIBA\u201d was deceptively similar to \u201cTOSHIBA\u201d and that the appellant would ordinarily be entitled to restrain such use if its registration remained valid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Ultimately, the Court concluded that the High Court had failed to properly balance the equities and practical realities of the case. It held that the rectification order could not be sustained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-final-decision-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Final_Decision_of_the_Court\"><\/span>Final Decision of the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgement of the High Court. The Court held that the circumstances of the case did not justify removal of the appellant\u2019s trademark registration from the register. It found that the approach adopted by the High Court failed to adequately consider relevant factors, including the appellant\u2019s continuing interest in protecting the trademark and the absence of meaningful prejudice to the respondent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court restored the appellant\u2019s position and requested the Delhi High Court to dispose of the pending suit between the parties as expeditiously as possible. No order as to costs was made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-point-of-law-settled\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Point_of_Law_Settled\"><\/span>Point of Law Settled<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The judgement establishes that rectification proceedings based on non-use of a trademark require careful examination of the statutory requirements under Section 46 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 46(1) operate independently and address different situations. The protection available under Section 46(3) is confined to cases falling under Section 46(1)(b).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The decision further clarifies that the concept of a \u201cperson aggrieved\u201d differs under Sections 46 and 56 and that courts must assess locus standi in light of the purpose of the provision invoked.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Most importantly, the judgement emphasises that removal of a registered trademark is a discretionary remedy. Even where non-use is established, courts must consider the overall circumstances, including the proprietor\u2019s intention, the reputation of the mark, the conduct of the parties, and the practical consequences of rectification. The ruling reinforces protection for well-known trademarks while preserving safeguards against trademark trafficking and abuse of registration rights.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-case-details\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Details\"><\/span>Case Details<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Case Detail<\/th><th>Information<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Title of the Case<\/td><td>Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba Vs. Tosiba Appliances Co.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Date of Judgment\/Order<\/td><td>16 May 2008<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Case Number<\/td><td>Civil Appeal No. 3639 of 2008<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Neutral Citation<\/td><td>(2008) 10 SCC 766<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of Court<\/td><td>Supreme Court of India<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of Honourable Judges<\/td><td>Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice L.S. Panta<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman<\/strong>, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi<br><br><strong>Disclaimer: <\/strong>Images used herein do not reflect actual images used in the judgement, and the same are for illustrative purposes only. Readers are advised not to treat this as a substitute for legal advice, as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation.\u00a0\u00a0<br>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-related-links yoast-seo-related-links\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/supreme-court-heirs-eviction-bona-fide-need-2026\/\">Landlord\u2013Tenant Law Reimagined: Legal Heirs Can Amend Eviction Suit to Plead Bona Fide Need \u2014 A Transformative Ruling by the Supreme Court of India<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/protection-of-women-from-domestic-violence-act-2005-guide\/\">Domestic Violence Act: How to File a DV Case and Get Protection Orders<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/eviction-of-tenants-ground-of-genuine-requirement-legal-perspective\/\">Eviction of Tenants on the Ground of Genuine Requirement: A Legal Perspective<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-infringement-action-sustained-despite-suspension-of-drug-licence\/\">Trademark Infringement Action Sustained Despite Suspension of Drug Licence<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/infringement-protection-independent-of-commercial-use\/\">Infringement Protection Independent of Commercial Use<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. \u2013 Supreme Court Judgment on Trademark Non-Use and Rectification in India Introduction The Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. is a significant judgement in Indian trademark law dealing with the removal of trademarks from the register on the ground of non-use and the<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[5149],"class_list":["post-26745","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-intellectual-property","tag-intellectual-property"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.9 (Yoast SEO v27.9) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Explore the landmark 2008 Supreme Court judgment in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. on trademark non-use, Section 46 rectification, and protection of the famous TOSHIBA mark in India.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Explore the landmark 2008 Supreme Court judgment in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. on trademark non-use, Section 46 rectification, and protection of the famous TOSHIBA mark in India.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Legal Service India - Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-06T06:02:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-07-06T06:05:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\"},\"headline\":\"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-06T06:02:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-06T06:05:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1901,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Intellectual Property\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Intellectual Property\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/\",\"name\":\"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-06T06:02:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-06T06:05:06+00:00\",\"description\":\"Explore the landmark 2008 Supreme Court judgment in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. on trademark non-use, Section 46 rectification, and protection of the famous TOSHIBA mark in India.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Trademark Laws > Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India - Law Articles\",\"description\":\"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"width\":105,\"height\":95,\"caption\":\"Legal Service India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/legalservicesind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legalserviceind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\",\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"url\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"contentUrl\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"caption\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\"},\"description\":\"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/author\\\/ajayamitabhsuman\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"Explore the landmark 2008 Supreme Court judgment in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. on trademark non-use, Section 46 rectification, and protection of the famous TOSHIBA mark in India.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court","og_description":"Explore the landmark 2008 Supreme Court judgment in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. on trademark non-use, Section 46 rectification, and protection of the famous TOSHIBA mark in India.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-07-06T06:02:15+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-07-06T06:05:06+00:00","author":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legalserviceind","twitter_site":"@legalserviceind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/"},"author":{"name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305"},"headline":"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court","datePublished":"2026-07-06T06:02:15+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-06T06:05:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/"},"wordCount":1901,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"keywords":["Intellectual Property"],"articleSection":["Intellectual Property"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/","name":"Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-07-06T06:02:15+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-06T06:05:06+00:00","description":"Explore the landmark 2008 Supreme Court judgment in Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba v. Tosiba Appliances Co. on trademark non-use, Section 46 rectification, and protection of the famous TOSHIBA mark in India.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-trafficking-and-bona-fide-intention-to-use-under-indian-law-kabushiki-kaisha-toshiba-vs-tosiba-appliances-co-by-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Trademark Laws > Trademark Trafficking and Bona Fide Intention to Use under Indian Law: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba vs Tosiba Appliances Co. by Supreme Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","name":"Legal Service India - Law Articles","description":"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization","name":"Legal Service India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","width":105,"height":95,"caption":"Legal Service India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","https:\/\/x.com\/legalserviceind","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305","name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","url":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","contentUrl":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","caption":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN"},"description":"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/author\/ajayamitabhsuman\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26745","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/56"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=26745"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26745\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27398,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26745\/revisions\/27398"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26745"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=26745"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=26745"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}