The Bombay High Court has upheld the order passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks which refused to include “TikTok” in the list of well-known trademarks under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Court observed that since the TikTok mobile application continues to be banned in India, this fact was rightly treated as a relevant consideration by the Registrar under Section 11(6) of the Act.
This Court is of the opinion that the banning of the application of the petitioner i.e. TikTok by the Government of India, while exercising power under the Information Technology Act and Rules, is indeed a relevant fact taken into consideration by the Registrar, Justice Manish Pitale stated in the order delivered on June 10, 2025.
Read Also:-Patanjali Foods Moves Bombay High Court Seeking Removal of Encroachers from Raigad Land
The Court was hearing a petition filed by TikTok Limited seeking to set aside the Registrar’s decision dated October 31, 2023, which had rejected the company's application for inclusion of the “TikTok” trademark in the well-known list under Rule 124 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017.
TikTok Limited argued that the Registrar's order was passed without proper reasoning and merely relied on Government press releases and news articles, without applying independent judgment. It also contended that the Registrar had incorrectly invoked Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act, which was irrelevant to its application under Rule 124, and had failed to consider the applicable factors listed under Section 11(6).
"It was submitted that even if, consequent upon the ban imposed by the Government of India, the trade mark is not being used in India, that in itself cannot be a ground to hold against the petitioner," the counsel for TikTok argued.
TikTok claimed that the ban was temporary and that some of the other applications banned alongside it had later resumed operations. Hence, the app’s current unavailability should not be treated as a decisive factor in denying it the well-known status.
Read Also:-Bombay High Court Prohibits Immersion of PoP Idols in Natural Water Bodies
However, the Court noted that the Registrar had evaluated several key aspects while passing the order, including the fact that the TikTok application was banned on grounds relating to national sovereignty, integrity, and public order under the Information Technology Act. The Registrar had also referred to issues such as concerns over data privacy, with servers being located in China, as well as incidents of cyberbullying and inappropriate content shared through the platform.
"The reasons why the application of the petitioner bearing the trade mark TikTok has been banned pertain to the sovereignty and integrity of India, its Defence and Public Order. These are serious matters, which cannot be ignored and therefore, it is found that the respondent did take into consideration relevant factors while passing the impugned order," Justice Pitale observed.
The Court clarified that although Section 11(6) outlines a list of factors to consider while determining whether a trademark is well-known, the list is illustrative and not exhaustive. This means the Registrar is empowered to consider any fact deemed relevant, including the current legal status of the application associated with the trademark in India.
"Merely because the ban on certain other applications has been lifted cannot be a ground for the petitioner to claim that the impugned order is rendered erroneous," the Court added.
It was also noted that although the TikTok trademark is registered in India and enjoys statutory protection under the Trade Marks Act, inclusion in the well-known trademarks list offers additional legal benefits. However, due to the app’s ban, the Registrar's decision to withhold this extra protection was justified.
Dismissing the petition, the Court held that there was no legal error in the Registrar's approach and that the decision was in line with the legislative intent and constitutional considerations.
The matter was argued by a team of advocates representing TikTok Limited including Swati Mittal, Manisha Singh, Abhai Pandey, and others, while the Registrar was represented by advocates Yashodeep Deshmukh, Leena Patil, and V. Deshmukh.
Case Title: TikTok Limited vs Registrar of Trade Marks
Case No.: Commercial Miscellaneous Petition No. 10 of 2024
Pronounced on: June 10, 2025
