‘Why not Chutiyaram?’: Namkeen brand applicant challenges Trademark Registry’s U-turn

The applicant seeking to trademark ‘Chutiyaram’ for a namkeen (snack) brand has challenged the Trademark Registry’s decision to withdraw its earlier approval, alleging that the reversal was influenced by media pressure and a systemic bias against Hindi and vernacular languages. The controversy erupted after the registry first accepted the trademark application under Class 30 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, but later retracted it, citing an “error.”

In a written response, applicant Sadhna Goswami argued that the withdrawal lacked a valid legal basis and was instead the result of a media trial and external influence. She accused media outlets of sensationalizing the approval and claimed that the backlash led the registry to unfairly revoke the mark’s acceptance. The response, filed by her lawyer Anil Yadav, was also shared on LinkedIn.

Goswami defended the term “Chutiyaram चुटियाराम,” asserting that it derives from “Chutiya” (a Sanskrit word for the sacred tuft of hair in Hinduism) and “Ram” (referring to Lord Rama). She insisted that the name carries spiritual and cultural significance, rather than being a slang term. Furthermore, she pointed out previous approvals of trademarks such as “Boob,” “Lauda,” and “Pussy in Boots”, questioning why her mark faced opposition while these were registered without issue.

The applicant also accused the Trademark Registry of discrimination against Hindi, stating that the digital filing system lacks a proper module for processing Hindi word marks, forcing applicants to transliterate their brands into English. She argued that this reflects a colonial hangover and urged the authorities to address systemic biases against Hindi and other vernacular languages.

On March 18, the Trademark Registry formally withdrew the acceptance of ‘Chutiyaram’, claiming that it was open to objections under Sections 9 and 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and proposed withdrawal under Section 19, with a hearing scheduled. However, the applicant maintains that the decision undermines the legal sanctity of the trademark registration process and called on the registry to function independently, without external pressure.

Demanding the reinstatement of her trademark approval, Goswami urged the authorities to uphold the principles of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, ensuring that future decisions remain free from media influence or linguistic bias. The case has now sparked a larger debate on linguistic discrimination in India’s trademark system and the role of media in influencing regulatory decisions.