In the third week of August 2026, the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) published a draft revised Manual of Trade Marks Practice and Procedure, inviting comments and suggestions from stakeholders. For trademark practitioners and brand owners in India, this is a notable development: the Manual has not seen a substantive overhaul since 2015, even though the Trade Marks Registry’s day-to-day workflow, filing systems, and examination practice have changed considerably in the intervening decade.
What the Manual Actually Is
It is worth being precise about what a “Manual” is and is not. The Manual of Trade Marks Practice and Procedure is not primary legislation. The governing law remains the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Trade Marks Rules framed under it. The Manual is an internal administrative guide issued by the Registry, setting out how examiners, hearing officers, and registry staff are expected to interpret and apply the Act and Rules in practice – things like examination benchmarks, the conduct of opposition and rectification proceedings, and how various categories of applications (collective marks, certification marks, well-known mark claims, and so on) are to be processed.
Because the Manual does not have the force of law in the way a statute does, it cannot override the Act or Rules, and courts are not bound by it. In practice, however, it strongly shapes how the Registry actually behaves on the ground, which makes it very relevant to anyone filing, opposing, or defending a trademark application in India.
What the 2026 Draft Proposes
Based on the CGPDTM’s public notification, the draft Manual is intended to modernise the 2015 version in a few key respects:
- Digitisation of workflows: formal recognition of the Registry’s shift toward e-filing, electronic hearings, and online status tracking, aligning the written Manual with practices that have, in many respects, already become the norm informally.
- Expanded guidance on opposition procedure: more detailed treatment of the steps in an opposition – from the notice of opposition through counter-statement, evidence, and hearing – which practitioners have long felt needed clearer, more consistent articulation across different Registry offices.
- A dedicated chapter on prior user claims and well-known marks: a more structured framework for how applicants and opponents can establish and document prior use, and how claims to well-known mark status are to be evaluated and processed by the Registry.
The CGPDTM notification gave stakeholders a short window, reportedly around two weeks from the date of publication, to send in comments and suggestions. Readers should treat that window as likely closed by the time this post is published, given how narrow it was. What happens next – whether the Registry issues a further revised draft, holds consultations, or proceeds directly to a final version – has not yet been made public.
Why This Is Worth Watching, Even Before the Final Version
A few reasons this draft deserves attention now, rather than only once it is finalised:
- It signals direction of travel. Even in draft form, the areas the Registry has chosen to focus on – digitisation, opposition procedure, and prior user/well-known mark claims – tell us where examination and hearing practice is likely to tighten or become more formalised.
- Well-known mark claims are getting more scrutiny. If the final Manual does introduce a more structured framework for well-known mark determinations, applicants relying on informal or anecdotal evidence of reputation should expect to be asked for more rigorous documentation going forward.
- Opposition practice may become more standardised. Brand owners who have experienced inconsistent procedural handling of oppositions across different Registry benches may see this as a welcome move, provided the final language is clear and is actually followed uniformly.
Practical Takeaways for Businesses and Applicants
- Do not assume the current (2015) Manual position will remain unchanged indefinitely – if you are relying on a specific procedural interpretation in an ongoing matter, flag with your counsel that a revision is in progress.
- If you are planning to assert prior use or well-known mark status in an upcoming application or opposition, start assembling documentary evidence now – invoice trails, advertising spend records, market surveys, and prior registrations – rather than waiting for the final Manual to specify a format.
- Keep an eye on the CGPDTM’s official notifications page for the finalised Manual once it is issued, since the version that eventually takes effect may differ from the draft summarised here.
- For businesses with active oppositions or examination matters, ask your trademark counsel whether the pending revision has any bearing on strategy or timelines in your specific case.
We will track the CGPDTM’s next steps on this and post an update once the Manual is finalised or a further draft is released.
By Sevenelementz Legal Associates LLP, Advocates & IP Attorneys, Chennai.
Disclaimer: This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and their interpretation may change, and individual circumstances vary. For advice specific to your situation, please consult Sevenelementz Legal Associates LLP or another qualified advocate.