Relief in suits for infringement or for passing off
Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 deals with relief in suits for infringement or for passing off. The relief which a court may grant in any suit for infringement or for passing off referred to in section 134 includes injunction (subject to such terms, if any, as the court thinks fit) and at the option of the plaintiff, either damages or an account of profits, together with or without any order f The Act came into force on 15 Sep 2003.
(1) The relief which a court may grant in any suit for infringement or for passing off referred to in section 134 includes injunction (subject to such terms, if any, as the court thinks fit) and at the option of the plaintiff, either damages or an account of profits, together with or without any order for the delivery-up of the infringing labels and marks for destruction or erasure.
(2) The order of injunction under sub-section (1) may include an ex parte injunction or any interlocutory order for any of the following matters, namely:--
(a) for discovery of documents;
(b) preserving of infringing goods, documents or other evidence which are related to the subject-matter of the suit;
(c) restraining the defendant from disposing of or dealing with his assets in a manner which may adversely affect plaintiff's ability to recover damages, costs or other pecuniary remedies which may be finally awarded to the plaintiff.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the court shall not grant relief by way of damages (other than nominal damages) or on account of profits in any case--
(a) where in a suit for infringement of a trade mark, the infringement complained of is in relation to a certification trade mark or collective mark; or
(b) where in a suit for infringement the defendant satisfies the court--
(i) that at the time he commenced to use the trade mark complained of in the suit, he was unaware and had no reasonable ground for believing that the trade mark of the plaintiff was on the register or that the plaintiff was a registered user using by way of permitted use; and
(ii) that when he became aware of the existence and nature of the plaintiff's right in the trade mark, he forthwith ceased to use the trade mark in relation to goods or services in respect of which it was registered; or
(c) where in a suit for passing off, the defendant satisfies the court--
(i) that at the time he commenced to use the trade mark complained of in the suit, he was unaware and had no reasonable ground for believing that the trade mark for the plaintiff was in use; and
(ii) that when he became aware of the existence and nature of the plaintiff's trade mark he forthwith ceased to use the trade mark complained of.
Section 135, The Trade Marks Act, 1999 (Act 47 of 1999).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Nirav Nimmi Corporation v. Ashish Traders
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
DATE VERIFIED Judgment pronounced 07.03.2025 (order-6.pdf): In a TM infringement / copyright suit, where plaintiff shows registered mark and prima facie case, temporary injunction under the TM Act’s remedial scheme (s.135 reliefs) normally follows; trial court erred in refusing injunction by undervaluing registration and misreading validity/consent disputes. Appeal from Order partly allowed — injunction application allowed till suit disposal; s.124(5) noted that stay on validity issues does not bar interlocutory injunction.
On this section: s.135 — relief in infringement/passing-off suits includes interlocutory injunction; registration + prima facie case ordinarily warrants injunction.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 135
What have the courts held on Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act?
Nirav Nimmi Corporation v. Ashish Traders (07 Mar 2025) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.135 — relief in infringement/passing-off suits includes interlocutory injunction; registration + prima facie case ordinarily warrants injunction.
How do I find court cases under Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Trade Marks Act 135, section 135 Trade Marks Act, section 135 of the Trade Marks Act. People searching for it also type trademark act 1999 section 135. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Nirav Nimmi Corporation v. Ashish Traders (07 Mar 2025).
What should I read with Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 134 (Suit for infringement, etc., to be instituted before District Court), so none of them can safely be read on its own.
When did Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act come into force?
Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, cited as Trade Marks Act 135, came into force on 15 Sep 2003, having been enacted on 30 Dec 1999. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions and interpretation1911 words
- 157. Power to make rules1216 words
- 11. Relative grounds for refusal of registration985 words
- 47. Removal from register and imposition of limitations on ground of non-use716 words
- 30. Limits on effect of registered trade mark657 words
- 29. Infringement of registered trade marks651 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.