{"id":27012,"date":"2026-07-08T05:57:36","date_gmt":"2026-07-08T05:57:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=27012"},"modified":"2026-07-08T06:03:28","modified_gmt":"2026-07-08T06:03:28","slug":"laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/","title":{"rendered":"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 id=\"h-introduction\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The decision of the Supreme Court in <strong>Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah &amp; <\/strong>Anr is one of the most important judgements in Indian trademark and passing off jurisprudence. The case concerns the protection of business goodwill associated with a trade name and the circumstances in which courts should grant interim injunctions to prevent passing off. The judgement is frequently cited for its authoritative exposition of the law relating to trade names, goodwill, business reputation, deceptive similarity, and interim relief.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_85 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\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/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\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Factual_And_Procedural_Background\" >Factual And Procedural Background<\/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\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Dispute_Before_The_Court\" >Dispute Before The Court<\/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\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Reasoning_And_Analysis_Of_The_Court\" >Reasoning And Analysis Of The Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Important_Authorities_Relied_Upon\" >Important Authorities Relied Upon<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Essential_Elements_Of_Passing_Off\" >Essential Elements Of Passing Off<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Principles_Governing_Interim_Injunctions\" >Principles Governing Interim Injunctions<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Application_Of_Law_To_The_Facts\" >Application Of Law To The Facts<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Appellate_Interference_In_Injunction_Matters\" >Appellate Interference In Injunction Matters<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Final_Decision_Of_The_Court\" >Final Decision Of The Court<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Point_Of_Law_Settled\" >Point Of Law Settled<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Key_Legal_Principles_Emerging_From_the_Judgement\" >Key Legal Principles Emerging From the Judgement<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Case_Summary\" >Case Summary<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#Disclaimer\" >Disclaimer<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The significance of the decision extends far beyond trademark registration disputes. The Supreme Court clarified that even where a business name is not a registered trademark, the goodwill associated with that name constitutes a valuable proprietary right deserving legal protection. The ruling is particularly important for small and medium businesses, professional service providers, traders, entrepreneurs, and intellectual property practitioners because it recognises that reputation painstakingly built over time cannot be appropriated by competitors through deceptively similar business names.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-factual-and-procedural-background\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Factual_And_Procedural_Background\"><\/span>Factual And Procedural Background<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The appellant, Laxmikant V. Patel, was carrying on the business of colour laboratory and photographic studio services in Ahmedabad under the name and style of <strong>\u201cMuktajivan Colour Lab and Studio&#8221;.<\/strong> According to the appellant, the business had commenced in 1982 and over the years had acquired substantial goodwill and reputation among customers. Considerable expenditure had been incurred on advertising, promotional activities, signboards, stationery, invoices, albums, and other business materials prominently displaying the word <strong>&#8220;Muktajivan&#8221;.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">As the business expanded, additional establishments were opened by the appellant\u2019s wife and relatives at different locations in Ahmedabad using the name <strong>\u201cMuktajivan\u201d<\/strong> as part of their business identity. The appellant claimed that the name had become closely associated in the minds of consumers with the quality and reputation of his photographic services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The dispute arose when the first respondent, who had previously been carrying on a similar business under the name <strong>\u201cGokul Studio&#8221;,<\/strong> proposed to commence business through his wife under the name <strong>\u201cMuktajivan Colour Lab and Studio&#8221;.<\/strong> The appellant alleged that the adoption of the identical business name was intended to exploit the goodwill already established by him and to mislead customers into believing that the respondents\u2019 business was associated with or connected to his business.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 12 May 1997, the appellant instituted a passing off action before the District Court at Ahmedabad seeking a permanent injunction restraining the respondents from passing off their business, services, and goods as those of the appellant. Along with the suit, an application for an interim injunction was also filed. Initially, an ex parte order was granted. However, after hearing both parties, the trial court dismissed the injunction application.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The trial court found that the respondents had recently adopted the word <strong>\u201cMuktajivan\u201d<\/strong> and that their business name was substantially similar to that of the appellant. Nevertheless, the Court refused the injunction primarily because the businesses were situated approximately four to five kilometres apart in Ahmedabad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The appellant challenged the decision before the Gujarat High Court. The High Court dismissed the appeal and vacated the interim protection. It held that the respondents\u2019 business had already commenced and that the appellant could not seek preventive relief. It further questioned the appellant\u2019s interest in certain related business establishments operated by family members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Aggrieved by these findings, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-dispute-before-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dispute_Before_The_Court\"><\/span>Dispute Before The Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether the respondents could be restrained from using the trade name <strong>\u201cMuktajivan Colour Lab and Studio\u201d<\/strong> in a business similar to that of the appellant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court was required to determine whether the following were true:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The appellant had established goodwill and reputation in the trade name <strong>&#8220;Muktajivan&#8221;<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The respondents\u2019 adoption of the same name was likely to cause confusion among consumers.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A prima facie case existed for the grant of an interim injunction.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The respondents argued that their business was situated at a different location, that the plaintiff had not established exclusive rights over the word <strong>&#8220;Muktajivan&#8221;,<\/strong> and that the business had already commenced before the institution of the suit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The appellant contended that geographical distance was irrelevant in modern commercial transactions and that the respondents were attempting to ride upon the goodwill built by the appellant over many years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-reasoning-and-analysis-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Reasoning_And_Analysis_Of_The_Court\"><\/span>Reasoning And Analysis Of The Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court undertook a detailed examination of the legal principles governing passing off actions and protection of trade names. The Court observed that it is common for traders and businessmen to adopt names under which they conduct business and that such names often acquire goodwill and reputation over time. Once a trade name becomes associated with a particular business, it constitutes valuable commercial property deserving legal protection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court referred extensively to authoritative principles contained in <em>Kerly&#8217;s Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names<\/em>, observing that a business name ordinarily carries with it goodwill which courts will protect. The Court noted that an action for passing off lies wherever a defendant adopts a name calculated to deceive the public, divert business, or create confusion between two businesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court emphasised that the law does not permit a person to conduct business in a manner that persuades customers to believe that his goods or services belong to another trader. It observed that commercial morality and fair competition require protection of established business reputations. A competitor cannot benefit from another&#8217;s goodwill through deceptive practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-important-authorities-relied-upon\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Important_Authorities_Relied_Upon\"><\/span>Important Authorities Relied Upon<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Authority<\/th><th>Purpose<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Kerly&#8217;s Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names<\/td><td>Protection of business goodwill and trade names.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Oertli Vs Bowman (1957 RPC 388)<\/td><td>Essential ingredients of passing off.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Salmond &amp; Heuston on the Law of Torts<\/td><td>Passing off as an injurious falsehood.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-essential-elements-of-passing-off\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Essential_Elements_Of_Passing_Off\"><\/span>Essential Elements Of Passing Off<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court relied upon <em>Oertli Vs Bowman (1957 RPC 388)<\/em> and observed that the essential elements of a passing-off action are reputation, likelihood of deception, and likelihood of damage. These principles, though traditionally applied to trademarks, apply equally to trade names.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The judgement also discussed the observations in <em>Salmond &amp; Heuston on the Law of Torts<\/em>, where passing off is described as a form of injurious falsehood designed to protect business reputations and goodwill from unfair competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-principles-governing-interim-injunctions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Principles_Governing_Interim_Injunctions\"><\/span>Principles Governing Interim Injunctions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Turning to interim injunctions, the Supreme Court reiterated the settled principles that a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and likelihood of irreparable injury. The court emphasised that actual fraud is not necessary in passing off actions. Even the absence of dishonest intention is not a defence where the defendant\u2019s conduct is likely to create confusion. The likelihood of damage is sufficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Requirement<\/th><th>Explanation<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Prima Facie Case<\/td><td>The plaintiff must demonstrate an arguable legal right requiring protection.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Balance Of Convenience<\/td><td>The inconvenience caused by refusing relief should outweigh the inconvenience caused by granting it.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Irreparable Injury<\/td><td>The plaintiff should show that monetary compensation alone would not be an adequate remedy.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-application-of-law-to-the-facts\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Application_Of_Law_To_The_Facts\"><\/span>Application Of Law To The Facts<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Applying these principles, the Court found that the appellant had been using \u201cMuktajivan\u201d as part of his business name at least since 1995 and had acquired substantial goodwill associated with it. The respondents had previously conducted business under the name \u201cGokul Studio\u201d and only later adopted &#8220;Muktajivan&#8221;. The Court concluded that the intention to take advantage of the appellant\u2019s reputation was apparent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court strongly disagreed with the reasoning of the trial court and high court that the distance of four to five kilometres between the businesses was relevant. The court observed that in a city, such distance is insignificant, and customers may travel several kilometres to avail better services. Once goodwill and reputation are established, geographical proximity cannot be treated as a decisive factor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The court also rejected the contention that there was delay in filing the suit. It noted that the respondents had not clearly established when they had commenced the allegedly infringing business and that the plaintiff had acted promptly upon learning of the threatened injury.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-appellate-interference-in-injunction-matters\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Appellate_Interference_In_Injunction_Matters\"><\/span>Appellate Interference In Injunction Matters<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">While discussing appellate interference in injunction matters, the Court referred to <em>Wander Ltd v. Antox India Pvt. Ltd, MANU\/SC\/0595\/1990,<\/em> and <em>N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corporation, (1996) 5 SCC 714<\/em>, reiterating that appellate courts ordinarily do not interfere with discretionary orders unless settled principles of law have been ignored. The court found that both the trial court and high court had failed to apply the established principles governing passing off and interlocutory injunctions, thereby justifying interference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-final-decision-of-the-court\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Final_Decision_Of_The_Court\"><\/span>Final Decision Of The Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the orders of the trial court and the Gujarat High Court. It granted an ad interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure restraining the respondents from directly or indirectly using the word \u201cMuktajivan\u201d in connection with their colour laboratory and studio business or any other name identical or deceptively similar to the appellant\u2019s trade name.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court also awarded costs in favour of the appellant. At the same time, it clarified that the observations made in the judgement were confined to the interlocutory stage and would not prejudice the final adjudication of the suit on merits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-point-of-law-settled\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Point_Of_Law_Settled\"><\/span>Point Of Law Settled<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The judgement firmly establishes that goodwill and reputation associated with a trade name constitute valuable commercial property protected by law. An action for passing off is maintainable not only in respect of registered trademarks but also in relation to business names and trade names that have acquired goodwill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The decision clarifies that the three essential elements of passing off are goodwill or reputation, likelihood of deception, and likelihood of damage. Fraudulent intention is not necessary. Even innocent adoption of a deceptively similar trade name can justify injunctive relief if confusion is likely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Supreme Court further held that geographical distance between competing businesses is not decisive where goodwill extends beyond a limited locality. The judgement remains a leading authority on passing off, protection of trade names, and the grant of interim injunctions in intellectual property disputes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-key-legal-principles-emerging-from-the-judgement\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Legal_Principles_Emerging_From_the_Judgement\"><\/span>Key Legal Principles Emerging From the Judgement<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Goodwill attached to a trade name is a valuable proprietary right.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Passing off protects both registered and unregistered trade names.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Actual fraud is not essential for obtaining relief.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Likelihood of deception and likelihood of damage are sufficient.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Geographical distance alone does not defeat a passing off claim.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Business reputation deserves protection against unfair competition.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Courts should grant interim injunctions where the settled legal tests are satisfied.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-case-summary\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Summary\"><\/span>Case Summary<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Particular<\/th><th>Details<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Title of the Case<\/td><td>Laxmikant V. Patel Vs Chetanbhat Shah and Another<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Date of Judgment\/Order<\/td><td>04 December 2001<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Case Number<\/td><td>Civil Appeal Nos. 8266\u20138267 of 2001<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Citation<\/td><td>(2002) 3 SCC 65<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of Court<\/td><td>Supreme Court of India<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of the Honourable Judge<\/td><td>Hon&#8217;ble Mr Justice R.C. Lahoti and Hon&#8217;ble Mr Justice K.G. Balakrishnan<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Written By<\/td><td>Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-disclaimer\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Disclaimer\"><\/span>Disclaimer<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Images used herein do not reflect actual images used in Judgement, and the same are for illustrative purposes only. Readers are advised not to treat this as a substitute for legal advice, as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-related-links yoast-seo-related-links\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/k-narayanan-v-s-murali-passing-off-trademark-jurisdiction-supreme-court\/\">Can Filing a Trademark Application Create a Passing-Off Claim? Supreme Court Explains in K. Narayanan v. S. Murali<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/the-importance-of-conducting-a-trademark-search-before-filing-a-trademark-application\/\">The Importance of Conducting a trademark search before filing a trademark application<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-law-explained-a-guide-to-protecting-brand-rights\/\">Trademark law explained: A Guide to Protecting Brand Rights<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/types-of-injunctions-concept-classification-and-judicial-interpretation\/\">Types of Injunctions: Concept, Classification, and Judicial Interpretation<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/supreme-court-stay-of-decree-copyright-passing-off-acquiescence-case-analysis\/\">Supreme Court on Stay of Decree After Trial: Copyright Infringement, Passing-Off, Acquiescence &amp; Advocate Conduct Explained<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Introduction The decision of the Supreme Court in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah &amp; Anr is one of the most important judgements in Indian trademark and passing off jurisprudence. The case concerns the protection of business goodwill associated with a trade name and the circumstances in which courts should grant interim injunctions to prevent<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","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,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[5149],"class_list":["post-27012","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-intellectual-property","tag-intellectual-property"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.9 (Yoast SEO v28.0) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Learn how the Supreme Court protected trade names, goodwill and passing off rights in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Learn how the Supreme Court protected trade names, goodwill and passing off rights in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Legal Service India - Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-08T05:57:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-07-08T06:03:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\"},\"headline\":\"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-08T05:57:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-08T06:03:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1910,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Intellectual Property\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Intellectual Property\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/\",\"name\":\"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-08T05:57:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-08T06:03:28+00:00\",\"description\":\"Learn how the Supreme Court protected trade names, goodwill and passing off rights in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Trademark Laws > Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off & Trade Name Judgment Explained\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India - Law Articles\",\"description\":\"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"width\":105,\"height\":95,\"caption\":\"Legal Service India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/legalservicesind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legalserviceind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\",\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"url\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"contentUrl\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"caption\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\"},\"description\":\"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/author\\\/ajayamitabhsuman\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"Learn how the Supreme Court protected trade names, goodwill and passing off rights in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained","og_description":"Learn how the Supreme Court protected trade names, goodwill and passing off rights in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-07-08T05:57:36+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-07-08T06:03:28+00:00","author":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legalserviceind","twitter_site":"@legalserviceind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/"},"author":{"name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305"},"headline":"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained","datePublished":"2026-07-08T05:57:36+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-08T06:03:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/"},"wordCount":1910,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"keywords":["Intellectual Property"],"articleSection":["Intellectual Property"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/","name":"Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off &amp; Trade Name Judgment Explained - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-07-08T05:57:36+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-08T06:03:28+00:00","description":"Learn how the Supreme Court protected trade names, goodwill and passing off rights in Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/laxmikant-v-patel-vs-chetanbhat-shah-passing-off-trade-name-judgment\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Trademark Laws > Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhat Shah (2002): Supreme Court Landmark Passing Off & Trade Name Judgment Explained"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","name":"Legal Service India - Law Articles","description":"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization","name":"Legal Service India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","width":105,"height":95,"caption":"Legal Service India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","https:\/\/x.com\/legalserviceind","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305","name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","url":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","contentUrl":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b894b0814afe1239db393e20da4b2e76?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","caption":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN"},"description":"Professional and Literary Profile Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate, is an alumnus of the Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, with over 20 years of experience in IP litigation before the Delhi High Court. He currently serves as a Patent and Trademark Attorney at United &amp; United, a leading intellectual property law firm. Deeply committed to legal scholarship, he has authored more than 900 articles on intellectual property law, published on major platforms including Legal Service India, Bar &amp; Bench, Live Law, SCC Online Blog, Legal Desire, SpicyIP, among others. Beyond his legal practice, he is also an accomplished writer and poet, with over 1,500 literary works and more than 20 books published in Hindi and English. His journey reflects a unique blend of legal advocacy and creative expression, inspired by a passion for justice, knowledge, and reform.","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/author\/ajayamitabhsuman\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27012","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=27012"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27012\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27520,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27012\/revisions\/27520"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27012"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27012"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27012"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}