{"id":10341,"date":"2025-10-16T11:59:44","date_gmt":"2025-10-16T11:59:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=10341"},"modified":"2025-10-16T12:04:40","modified_gmt":"2025-10-16T12:04:40","slug":"courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/","title":{"rendered":"Court\u2019s Power to Implead Legal Heirs in Trademark Disputes"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 id=\"facts\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Facts\"><\/span>Facts<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>This case involves a trademark dispute that traces back to the family business of <strong>Panchhi Petha Store<\/strong>, founded in 1952 in Agra by late Panchhi Lal. Over time, the business and the trademark rights were distributed between his two sons, <strong>Kanhaiya Lal<\/strong> and <strong>Subhash Chander<\/strong>, and their respective descendants.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/#Facts\" >Facts<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/#Procedural_Details\" >Procedural Details<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/#Dispute\" >Dispute<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/#Detailed_Reasoning\" >Detailed Reasoning<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/#Decision\" >Decision<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/courts-power-to-implead-legal-heirs-in-trademark-disputes\/#Case_Details\" >Case Details<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n<p>The original partnership registered the trademark <strong>&#8220;PANCHHI KA PETHA AUR DALMOTH&#8221;<\/strong> in 1971. After Panchhi Lal\u2019s passing, a family settlement was executed in 1982 stipulating rights to use the trademark and maintaining a one-kilometer distance between respective shops operating under the &#8220;PANCHHI&#8221; name.<\/p>\n<p>As years passed, disputes arose when the petitioners learned that the respondent, Subhash Chandbr, had secured multiple trademark registrations in different classes without their knowledge or inclusion. This led to the filing of rectification petitions challenging the registrations and asserting independent rights over the &#8220;PANCHHI&#8221; trademark, as stipulated in the family settlement.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"procedural-details\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Procedural_Details\"><\/span>Procedural Details<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Rectification petitions were originally filed before the <strong>Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB)<\/strong> and subsequently transferred to the <strong>Delhi High Court<\/strong> after the IPAB was abolished.<\/p>\n<p>During proceedings, two key petitioners\u2014<strong>Kanhaiya Lal<\/strong> and <strong>Anil Kumar<\/strong>\u2014passed away. Applications were filed to bring their legal heirs on record and to condone the delay in such filings due to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Bereavement and mourning periods<\/li>\n<li>Collection of legal documentation<\/li>\n<li>Ongoing mediation efforts<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Respondents objected, arguing that the applications were filed well beyond prescribed limits and that the cause of action had abated. Citing <em>Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC<\/em> and <em>Section 5 of the Limitation Act<\/em>, petitioners contended that the delay was unintentional and sought continuation of proceedings on merits.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"dispute\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dispute\"><\/span>Dispute<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The dispute centered on control and use of the <strong>&#8220;PANCHHI&#8221;<\/strong> trademark arising from the family settlement, as well as the right of descendants to conduct business under the established brand name.<\/p>\n<p>Petitioners argued that their rights were being undermined by the respondent\u2019s unilateral trademark registrations and sought rectification of the Trademark Register to restore the balance envisaged in the 1982 family settlement.<\/p>\n<p>The respondent resisted, citing procedural delays, lack of sufficient cause, and precedents suggesting abatement and loss of standing due to late filing.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"detailed-reasoning\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Detailed_Reasoning\"><\/span>Detailed Reasoning<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The Court examined the facts carefully, including the terms of the family settlement granting independent trademark rights to both family branches and their male descendants.<\/p>\n<p>It cited the Supreme Court judgment in <em>Mithailal Dalsanagar Singh v. Annabai Devram Kini (2003 10 SCC 691)<\/em>, emphasizing that applications to bring legal heirs on record should be liberally construed and that procedural technicalities must not override substantive justice.<\/p>\n<p>The Court found that bereavement, mediation efforts, and administrative complexities justified condoning the delay. Clause 4 of the family settlement was strongly relied upon, reaffirming that descendants retained the right to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Carry out business under the &#8220;PANCHHI&#8221; brand<\/li>\n<li>Take collective legal action to protect brand interests<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The Court also dismissed reliance on <em>DSGMC v. Jagmohan Singh (2021 SCC OnLine Del 5423)<\/em> and <em>Shivamma (Dead) by LRs v. Karnataka Housing Board (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1969)<\/em>, finding them inapplicable to the specific family context and independent rights at stake.<\/p>\n<p>The judge underscored that technical defaults should not bar parties from having their disputes decided on merits, particularly when equity and long-standing business interests are involved.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"decision\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Decision\"><\/span>Decision<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The Court allowed the applications for impleadment of legal heirs, condoned the delay, and restored the abated petitions. The legal heirs\u2014<strong>Mohit Goyal<\/strong>, <strong>Ankit Goyal<\/strong>, and <strong>Gaurav Goyal<\/strong>\u2014were impleaded with directions for the petitioners to file amended memoranda within two weeks and to pay costs of \u20b925,000 per case to the respondent.<\/p>\n<p>By adopting a justice-oriented approach instead of dismissing the petitions on procedural grounds, the Court reaffirmed that substantive rights, especially those arising from family settlements and registered trademarks, must be adjudicated on merits.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"case-details\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Details\"><\/span>Case Details<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th>Case Title<\/th>\n<td>Kanhaiya Lal and Others Vs. Subhash Chandbr and Another<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Order Date<\/th>\n<td>9th October 2025<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Case Number<\/th>\n<td>C.O. COMM.IPD-TM 339\/2022<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Neutral Citation<\/th>\n<td>2025:DHC:8983<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Court<\/th>\n<td>High Court of Delhi at New Delhi<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Hon\u2019ble Judge<\/th>\n<td>Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p class=\"disclaimer\"><strong>Disclaimer:<\/strong> The information shared here is intended to serve the public interest by offering insights and perspectives. Readers are advised to exercise discretion when interpreting and applying this information. The content may contain subjective views or interpretation errors.<\/p>\n<p class=\"author\"><strong>Written By:<\/strong> Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Facts This case involves a trademark dispute that traces back to the family business of Panchhi Petha Store, founded in 1952 in Agra by late Panchhi Lal. Over time, the business and the trademark rights were distributed between his two sons, Kanhaiya Lal and Subhash Chander, and their respective descendants. The original partnership registered the<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[28],"class_list":{"0":"post-10341","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-intellectual-property","7":"tag-top-news"},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10341","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/56"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10341"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10341\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10341"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10341"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10341"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}