(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking Writ of Certiorari, for directions and consequently to cancel the said registration, rectify the records along with renewal passed under Order No.RLC/683618 dated 25.12.2022, directions and direct the respondent No.1 to transfer the rectification proceedings bearing No.MAS-279782 initiated against trademark registration number 2441920 in class 43 filed by the respondent No.2, pending in the files of the respondent No.1 to the Intellectual property Division of this Honble court, calling for the records of the respondent No.1, pertaining to trademark application number 2441920 in class 43 especially including the order dated 24.12.2021 passed by the respondent No.1.)

1. The present Writ Petition was originally filed seeking multiple reliefs in relation to Trade Mark Registration No.2441920 in Class 43, including challenge to the registration and renewal of the said mark and a direction to the first respondent to transfer Rectification Proceeding No.MAS-279782, pending before the Trade Marks Registry, Chennai, to the Intellectual Property Division of this Court.

2. The petitioner, Surya Hotels & Properties, is engaged in the hospitality business. According to the petitioner, it adopted and has been using a composite mark containing the words “Misty Mountain Resort” in relation to hotel and resort services and obtained registration under Application No.1969012 in Class 43.

3. The mark which forms the subject matter of the present dispute is "Misty Mountain” bearing Application No.2441920 in Class 43. The said application was filed on 13.12.2012 claiming use from 01.08.1999.

4. The said application was opposed and proceedings bearing Opposition No.MAS-940638 were initiated before the Trade Marks Registry. The opposition was initially treated as abandoned by order dated 15.05.2019, following which Registration Certificate came to be issued on 06.06.2019.

5. Subsequently, further proceedings, including review and proceedings under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, arose before the first respondent. By order dated 24.12.2021, the registration certificate relating to the mark was cancelled and its status was directed to be reflected as “Review Filed”, with further proceedings to continue before the Trade Marks Registry.

6. Thereafter, proceedings were also instituted before the High Court of Kerala in relation to the said order. During the pendency of the various proceedings, the mark was renewed on 25.12.2022.

7. Aggrieved by the continuance and renewal of the said mark on the Register, the petitioner instituted Rectification Proceeding No.MAS-279782 before the first respondent on 17.07.2023, seeking removal/cancellation of Trade Mark Registration No.2441920 in Class 43.

8. According to the petitioner, pleadings in the rectification proceeding are complete, but the proceeding has not yet been taken up for final adjudication.

9. When the present writ petition came up for hearing on 08.09.2026, this Court noticed that the petitioner had sought distinct reliefs, namely, reliefs relating to cancellation of the trade mark registration and its renewal on the one hand, and transfer of the pending rectification proceeding on the other. A query was therefore raised as to whether such distinct reliefs could be pursued together in the present writ petition.

10. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner filed a memo dated 11.09.2026, stating that the petitioner was giving up all the other prayers and was restricting the writ petition only to the prayer for transfer of Rectification Proceeding No.MAS-279782 from the Trade Marks Registry, Chennai, to the Intellectual Property Division of this Court.

11. When the matter was thereafter taken up on 15.09.2026, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated that the other prayers were not pressed and that the petitioner was confining the writ petition only to the prayer for transfer.

12. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Section 125 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 expressly recognises transfer/reference of rectification proceedings pending before the Registrar to the High Court.

13. It was submitted that under Section 125(2), where an application for rectification under Sections 47 or 57 is pending before the Registrar, the Registrar may, at any stage of the proceedings, refer the application to the High Court. Therefore, the statutory scheme itself contemplates adjudication of a pending rectification proceeding by the High Court.

14. Learned counsel submitted that Rectification No.MAS-279782 is presently pending before the Registrar of Trade Marks, Chennai, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, this Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct the first respondent to transfer the proceeding to the Intellectual Property Division.

15. It was further submitted that the petitioner is not seeking transfer or consolidation of C.S.O.S.No.0001 of 2022 pending before the District Court, Thodupuzha, Kerala. Therefore, according to the petitioner, Rule 14 of the Madras High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022, dealing with consolidation of proceedings and transfer under Section 24 CPC, would not govern the present prayer.

16. Learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in Asia Match Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks & GI, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 8549, wherein this Court had directed transfer of a rectification proceeding pending before the Registrar to the High Court, taking note of Section 125(2) of the Trade Marks Act.

17. Learned counsel therefore submitted that since the rectification proceeding has remained pending before the first respondent and several connected proceedings concerning the same mark are also pending, transfer of the rectification proceeding to the Intellectual Property Division would facilitate an effective and expeditious adjudication.

18. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent, on instructions, submitted that a detailed counter affidavit had already been filed; however, in view of the petitioner giving up the other reliefs, the second respondent had no objection to the prayer seeking transfer of Rectification Proceeding No.MAS-279782 and submitted that the writ petition could be allowed to that extent.

19. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

20. In view of the memo dated 11.09.2026 filed by the petitioner, the only question which survives for consideration is whether Rectification Proceeding No.MAS-279782, presently pending before the Registrar of Trade Marks, Chennai, should be transferred to the Intellectual Property Division of this Court.

21. The other reliefs originally sought in the writ petition, including the reliefs relating to cancellation of the registration and renewal of Trade Mark No.2441920 in Class 43, are not pressed. Therefore, no adjudication is called for in respect of those reliefs.

22. Section 125(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 provides that, subject to sub-section (1), where an application for rectification of the Register is made to the Registrar under Section 47 or Section 57, the Registrar may, if he thinks fit, refer the application at any stage of the proceedings to the High Court.

23. Thus, the statute itself recognises that a rectification proceeding instituted before the Registrar may, in an appropriate case, be brought before the High Court for adjudication.

24. The decision of this Court in Asia Match Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks & GI also recognises the exercise of writ jurisdiction for directing transfer of a pending rectification proceeding from the Registrar of Trade Marks to the High Court in appropriate circumstances.

25. In the present case, Rectification No.MAS-279782 has been pending before the first respondent from 17.07.2023. The rectification concerns Trade Mark Registration No.2441920 in Class 43, which is also the subject matter of several proceedings between the parties.

26. It is significant that the petitioner is presently seeking only transfer of the rectification proceeding and not adjudication on the merits of the rectification petition in the present writ proceeding.

27. Further, the second respondent has expressly stated before this Court that, once the other prayers are not pressed, it has no objection to the transfer of Rectification No.MAS-279782 to this Court.

28. In such circumstances, no prejudice would be caused to either party by transfer of the rectification proceeding. On the contrary, transfer would enable the dispute regarding the validity and continuance of the impugned registration to be adjudicated by the Intellectual Property Division in accordance with law.

29. The various contentions raised by the parties in the writ affidavit, counter affidavit and rejoinder relating to prior use, ownership, validity of registration, renewal, opposition proceedings, review proceedings, proceedings before the High Court of Kerala and the locus standi of the respective parties are questions which properly fall for consideration in the rectification proceeding itself.

30. It is therefore neither necessary nor appropriate for this Court to express any opinion on those questions while deciding the limited prayer for transfer.

31. In view of Section 125(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the pendency of Rectification No.MAS-279782 before the first respondent and, more importantly, the absence of any objection on the part of the second respondent to the limited prayer now pursued by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the rectification proceeding may appropriately be transferred to the Intellectual Property Division of this Court.

32. Accordingly, W.P.(IPD) No.1 of 2026 is allowed to the limited extent indicated below:

                   (i) The first respondent, Registrar of Trade Marks, Chennai, is directed to transfer Rectification Proceeding No.MAS-279782, concerning Trade Mark Registration No.2441920 in Class 43, together with the entire records pertaining thereto, to the Intellectual Property Division of this Court.

                   (ii) The first respondent shall transmit the records to the Registry of this Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

                   (iii) On receipt of the records, the Registry shall number/re-number the rectification proceeding appropriately in accordance with the Madras High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022 and place the matter before the appropriate Bench.

                   (iv) The transferred rectification proceeding shall be decided independently on its own merits, after affording sufficient opportunity to all concerned parties, uninfluenced by any observation made in the present order.

                   (v) All questions relating to the validity, ownership, prior use, renewal or continuance of Trade Mark Registration No.2441920 in Class 43, including all contentions arising from the opposition, review and connected proceedings, are expressly left open.

33. In view of the memo dated 11.09.2026, all the other prayers originally sought in the writ petition are dismissed as not pressed.

34. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition, if any, is closed.