[2025:RJ-JP:41048] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 651/2023 Asha Agarwal, Proprietor Of M/s Orgrain India, 25B, Lajras Lane, Christian Ganj, Ajmer-305001, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Registrar Of Trade Marks, (Govt. Of India) Near Chanakyapuri Overbridge, Ghatlodiya, Ahemdabad (Guj.) 2. Organic India Private Limited, Unit 2, Gf, M-6 Uppal Plaza District Centre Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Through Authorised Signatory/owner/ Partner/ Proprietor/manager ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Das Bansal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Divyesh Maheshwari HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 09/10/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a limited prayer seeking directions to be issued to the respondent No.1; the Registrar of Trade Marks, Ahmedabad, to hear and finally dispose of the Trademark Application No.4801178 dt.30.12.2020. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application submitted on behalf of the petitioner for registration of the trademark in Class-29, was filed in the year 2020, but in spite of passing of considerable time, till date the said application has not been decided by the respondent No.1 by passing a reasoned and speaking order, so appropriate direction be issued to the respondent No.1 to decide the petitioner's registration application expeditiously within a time frame. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon the judgment passed by a Co- [2025:RJ-JP:41048] (2 of 3) [CW-651/2023] ordinate bench of this Court in the case of Mrs. Nirmala Kabra v. The Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18998/2022), wherein referring to the statutory provisions of the Trade Marks Act, directions have been given to the Registrar of Trade Marks to decide the said pending application within a period of three months. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not seek any adjudication upon the merits of the case and only prays for a direction to the Registrar of Trade Marks for expeditious disposal of pending application of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1- the Registrar of Trade Marks, does not oppose the said limited prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Looking to the facts of the present case, this Court is inclined to accept the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and hereby issues a direction to the respondent No.1- the Registrar of Trade Marks, to expeditiously decide the aforementioned pending application of the present petitioner preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. We also clarify that the Registrar of Trade Marks shall follow the statutory procedure provided under Rule 50 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002, and decide the said application after granting opportunity to all the parties. 6. While passing the judgment in the case of Mrs. Nirmala Kabra (supra), the Co-ordinate Bench has passed directions to the Registrar of Trade Marks to come up with a strategy to address the issue of back-log of pending applications. The relevant para of the said judgment, is quoted below:- [2025:RJ-JP:41048] (3 of 3) [CW-651/2023] "15. Before parting with this matter, this Court observes and expects from the Registrar of Trademarks to come up with a strategy to address this issue of backlog of pending applications. A fast and simple mechanism to secure the Intellectual Property Rights and in terms to secure the business, is tantamount and a need of the hour. By addressing this issue of delay in disposal of the pending Trademark Registration Applications, in an expeditious manner, the system can better serve the purpose in resolving the Trademark disputes fairly and effectively, upholding the principles of justice and maintaining public confidence." 7. We reiterate and expect that the compliance of the said directions shall be made by the respondent No.1 and an appropriate system shall be put in place ensuring effective & expeditious disposal of the pending applications. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. 9. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J SAHIL SONI /21