Trademark Renewal — Form TM-R

Under Section 25(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1999, a registered trademark is valid for 10 years from the date of registration (which is the date of application, per Section 23(2)) and must be renewed for successive periods of 10 years each. Form TM-R under Rule 57 of the Trade Marks Rules 2017 must be filed along with the prescribed renewal fee (₹9,000 per class for e-filing as per the Trade Marks Rules 2017 Schedule of Fees) before expiry of the registration. A 6-month grace period is available under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1999 for filing a belated renewal upon payment of an additional surcharge, currently ₹3,000 per class. If the mark is not renewed even within the grace period, it is removed from the register, and the proprietor must apply for restoration under Rule 62 of the Trade Marks Rules 2017 within one year of the expiry of the grace period, showing reasonable cause for the failure to renew. During the window between removal and restoration, the mark is vulnerable to third-party registration.

No. Form TM-R under Rule 57 of the Trade Marks Rules 2017 is strictly for the renewal of an existing registered mark in the existing class(es) without alteration. The Trade Marks Act 1999 does not permit amendments to the essential features of a registered mark under Section 57 or 58 read with Rule 67 — only minor amendments that do not substantially affect the mark's identity are permissible under Section 59(2). Adding new classes of goods or services requires filing an entirely fresh application under Section 18 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 for those additional classes, which will go through examination, potential objection, advertisement, and opposition stages independently. The renewal fee under Form TM-R is payable per class — so if your registration covers 3 classes, the fee is ₹9,000 × 3 = ₹27,000 for e-filing. The renewal date is calculated per class based on the original registration date in that class.

The 6-month grace period under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1999 allows a proprietor to renew a lapsed mark with a surcharge, but during this period the mark is technically expired and appears as 'removed' or 'expired' on the IP India public search portal. This creates a risk that a third party may apply for an identical or similar mark, particularly if the lapse is publicly visible through the journal or the search portal. While the Courts have in several cases protected a proprietor's prior rights based on prior use and the pending renewal under the law of passing off, the statutory protection under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 (right to sue for infringement) is suspended during the lapse. Renewal during the grace period restores the registration with retrospective effect from the date of expiry under Section 25(3), meaning no gap in protection is deemed to have existed — but only once the renewal is actually completed and the certificate issued. Timely renewal before expiry is therefore strongly preferred.

A trademark license or registered user agreement recorded under Section 49 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 is tied to the registration number and the validity period of the registered mark. When the principal registration expires and is renewed, the renewal updates the registration entry but does not automatically extend the recorded license agreement — the license agreement itself must be reviewed to ensure its term has not independently expired. A registered user status granted under Section 49 lapses if the principal mark is removed from the register for non-renewal; during the lapse period, the licensee's use of the mark technically has no statutory backing. It is advisable to record a long-form license agreement under Section 49 with an independent term that is not co-terminus with each renewal cycle, so the licensee's rights are protected through multiple renewal cycles without requiring fresh recordal each time. Any assignment of the mark under Section 37 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 — such as a sale to a new entity — must be separately registered using Form TM-P before the assignee is recognised as the registered proprietor with renewal rights.

If a trademark is removed from the register due to a clerical error, non-delivery of renewal notice, or inadvertent failure where the proprietor had intended to renew, an application for restoration can be made to the Registrar of Trade Marks under Section 25(4) of the Trade Marks Act 1999 read with Rule 62 of the Trade Marks Rules 2017, within one year of the expiry of the last registration, on showing reasonable cause. The application is filed in Form TM-R along with the renewal fee, the restoration fee, and a statement of reasons for the delay supported by an affidavit. If the restoration application is filed after the one-year window, the only remedy is a fresh application under Section 18, which loses the original priority date. Separately, if the removal was due to a Registry error — such as processing a timely Form TM-R incorrectly — a rectification petition lies under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 before the Registrar or the High Court, and the mark can be restored on the register with its original registration date intact.