{"id":29152,"date":"2026-08-05T05:27:13","date_gmt":"2026-08-05T05:27:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=29152"},"modified":"2026-08-05T05:41:55","modified_gmt":"2026-08-05T05:41:55","slug":"delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h1 id=\"h-cipla-limited-vs-union-of-india-amp-ors-trademark-restoration-renewal-and-third-party-rights\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Cipla_Limited_vs_Union_of_India_Ors_Trademark_Restoration_Renewal_and_Third-Party_Rights\"><\/span>Cipla Limited vs. Union of India &amp; Ors.: Trademark Restoration, Renewal, and Third-Party Rights<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h1>\n\n\n\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 procedural mechanics governing trademark restoration and renewal often present intricate questions regarding the locus standi of third parties. When a registered trademark is removed from the register due to non-renewal and subsequently restored by the Trade Marks Registry following judicial intervention, third parties operating in the same domain frequently seek to intervene. The High Court of Delhi examined these principles in a dispute involving the trademark NO DARAR in Class 5. The court addressed whether a third party alleging prejudice has a legal right to be impleaded in a writ petition concerning the administrative restoration and renewal of a trademark between the registered proprietor and the Trade Marks Registry.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_86 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-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Cipla_Limited_vs_Union_of_India_Ors_Trademark_Restoration_Renewal_and_Third-Party_Rights\" >Cipla Limited vs. Union of India &amp; Ors.: Trademark Restoration, Renewal, and Third-Party Rights<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-2' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/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\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#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-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Dispute_Before_the_Court\" >Dispute Before 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\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Applicants_Contentions\" >Applicant\u2019s Contentions<\/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\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Petitioner_and_Trademarks_Contentions\" >Petitioner and Trademark&#8217;s Contentions<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Reasoning_and_Analysis_of_the_Court\" >Reasoning and Analysis of the Court<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#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-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#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-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#Case_Details\" >Case Details<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\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 petitioner, Cipla Limited, filed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus or certiorari directing the respondents, including the Union of India and the Trade Marks Registry, to restore its trademark registration bearing application number 1694972 for the mark NO DARAR in Class 5, which had been registered on February 7, 2011. The petitioner further sought permission to file an application for the renewal of the said trademark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">During the initial proceedings, the Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the Registrar of Trade Marks submitted that although the statutory O-3 Notice was uploaded on the official website, its dispatch tracking report was untraceable. Consequently, without adjudicating the dispute on merits, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to submit an application for restoration and renewal along with the prescribed fees within two weeks, directing the Registrar to proceed in accordance with law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The petitioner subsequently filed an application seeking modification of the order, pointing out that the Trade Marks Registry had updated the status of the trademark application on its official website from Removed to Registered. Taking note of the Registry&#8217;s compliance, the High Court disposed of the modification application on May 30, 2025, as withdrawn, observing that no further directions were necessary since the mark was reflected as registered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Thereafter, an applicant third party challenged the order dated May 14, 2025, before the Supreme Court of India via Special Leave Petition SLP(C) No. 24856\/2025. The Supreme Court disposed of the SLP on August 29, 2025, observing that the applicant was not a party before the High Court and granting liberty to the applicant to file an appropriate application before the High Court to demonstrate how the order caused grave prejudice. Pursuant to this liberty, the applicant filed two interlocutory applications before the High Court: CM 298\/2025 under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking impleadment as a party, and CM 299\/2025 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking recall of the order dated May 14, 2025. Arguments on these applications were heard, leading to the judgment dated July 27, 2026.<\/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 core dispute concerned the rights of a third party to intervene in writ proceedings dealing strictly with administrative renewal and restoration of a trademark between the proprietor and the Registry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-applicant-s-contentions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Applicants_Contentions\"><\/span>Applicant\u2019s Contentions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The applicant argued that the Supreme Court\u2019s order dated August 29, 2025, conferred an absolute right to be heard on the merits of the dispute rather than merely seeking leave to demonstrate locus standi.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Relying on Rule 60 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017, the applicant contended that the restoration and renewal of the petitioner\u2019s mark were carried out without following statutory due process.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The applicant asserted that it was a necessary and proper party because the restoration perpetuated the petitioner&#8217;s trademark to the severe prejudice of the applicant\u2019s commercial interests.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-petitioner-and-trademark-s-contentions\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Petitioner_and_Trademarks_Contentions\"><\/span>Petitioner and Trademark&#8217;s Contentions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The petitioner and the Trade Marks Registry contended that the core issue in the writ petition pertained strictly to the administrative bilateral relationship between the registered proprietor and the Registry regarding non-service of the mandatory O-3 notice.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>They submitted that the petition involved a right in personam.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>They asserted that a third party is a rank outsider to renewal proceedings and has no locus standi to seek impleadment in a disposed-of writ petition.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The proper statutory remedy for any aggrieved third party, they argued, was to file an independent rectification application under the Trade Marks Act rather than intervening in administrative renewal matters.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\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 High Court undertook an analysis of the statutory framework governing party impleadment under Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Court emphasized that for a party to be added to a proceeding, its presence must be necessary to enable the court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit. Reaffirming settled procedural jurisprudence, the Court noted that a necessary party is one without whom no effective order can be made, whereas a proper party is one whose presence is indispensable for a complete and final decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In evaluating the facts, the Court observed that the writ petition was confined to the administrative non-action or procedural lapses of the Trade Marks Registry regarding the restoration of Application No. 1694972 in Class 5. The petitioner had raised no assertions, grounds, or prayers against any third party. Consequently, the matter pertained exclusively to a right in personam between the trademark owner and the statutory authority. The Court held that the applicant was a rank outsider with no direct connection to the subject matter of the writ petition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Addressing the applicant\u2019s reliance on the Supreme Court\u2019s order, the High Court clarified that the Supreme Court had merely granted liberty to the applicant to approach the High Court and establish whether it was a necessary and proper party. The order did not automatically grant impleadment or bypass the threshold requirements of Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Regarding the applicant\u2019s contention that the Registry failed to follow Rule 60 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017, and that the order dated May 14, 2025, allowed the Registry to perpetuate the mark, the Court held that these submissions pertained to subsequent actions taken by the Registry. Such subsequent administrative steps fell outside the scope and jurisdiction of the disposed-of writ petition. The Court held that the applicant was estopped from challenging subsequent administrative acts through interlocutory applications in a closed writ proceeding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">To reinforce its reasoning, the Court relied on the decisions in Epsilon Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India &amp; Ors., 2017 SCC OnLine Del 10607 (affirmed by the Division Bench in 2018 SCC OnLine Del 7625) and the Division Bench ruling of the Bombay High Court in Motwane Private Limited v. Registrar of Trade Marks &amp; Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 661. These precedents established that trademark renewal is strictly a matter between the Trade Marks Registry and the registered proprietor. The question of considering third-party rights at the stage of renewal or restoration does not arise. If a third party is aggrieved by the registration or restoration of a trademark, its remedy lies in initiating independent rectification proceedings as provided under the statute, rather than seeking to participate in the renewal process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court acknowledged the legal principles laid down in precedents cited by the applicant, including M\/s. Chopra Hotels Private Limited v. Harbinder Singh Sekhon &amp; Ors., 2026 INSC 335, Prabodh Verma &amp; Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh &amp; Ors., (1984) 4 SCC 251, and Times Publishing House Limited v. The Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks &amp; Ors., W.P.(C) No. 23545\/2005 (order dated December 14, 2006). However, the Court distinguished them on facts, holding that the applicant failed to show their applicability to a bilateral administrative renewal dispute.<\/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 High Court dismissed the application for impleadment under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CM 298\/2025) and the application for recall under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CM 299\/2025). The Court held that the applicant failed to establish its status as a necessary or proper party. Consequently, the application seeking a stay of the order dated May 30, 2025 (CM 297\/2025), was also dismissed, as nothing survived for adjudication. The Court made no order as to costs and clarified that the applicant remained at liberty to pursue appropriate statutory remedies, such as rectification proceedings, in accordance with law.<\/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\">This judgment reinforces that trademark restoration and renewal proceedings before the Trade Marks Registry, as well as writ petitions challenging administrative defaults in such processes, constitute matters strictly in personam between the registered proprietor and the Trade Marks Registry. Third parties have no locus standi to intervene or seek impleadment under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in proceedings concerning trademark renewal or restoration. Any third party aggrieved by the restoration or continued presence of a trademark on the register must exhaust independent statutory remedies, such as filing a rectification application under the Trade Marks Act, rather than interrupting bilateral administrative or judicial proceedings regarding renewal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-case-details\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Details\"><\/span>Case Details<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>Particulars<\/th><th>Details<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Title of the Case<\/td><td>Cipla Limited vs. Union of India &amp; Ors.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Date of Judgment<\/td><td>July 27, 2026<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Case Number<\/td><td>W.P.(C)-IPD 23\/2025<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of Court<\/td><td>High Court of Delhi at New Delhi<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Name of Hon&#8217;ble Judge<\/td><td>Honorable Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Written By:<\/strong> Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi<\/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\/beyond-retribution-victim-compensation-as-article-21s-constitutional-promise\/\">Beyond Retribution: Victim Compensation as Article 21\u2019s Constitutional Promise<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/mistake-of-patent-agent-and-judicial-equity\/\">Mistake of Patent Agent and Judicial Equity<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/justice-alito-originalism-supreme-court-constitutional-role\/\">Constitutional Restoration in an Age of Conflict: Justice Samuel Alito on Originalism, Liberty, and the Supreme Court<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/patent-protection-india\/\">Patent Protection India<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/trademark-protection-and-its-registration-process-in-india\/\">Trademark Protection and Its Registration Process in India<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/international-copyright-protection-cross-border-enforcement-guide\/\">International Copyright Protection <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/advanced-copyright-litigation-india-ai-digital-enforcement-guide\/\">Advanced Copyright Litigation in India <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/landmark-copyright-judgments-india-supreme-court-high-court\/\">Landmark Copyright Judgments in India <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/copyright-infringement-india-industry-specific-legal-guide\/\">Copyright Infringement in the Digital Economy <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/copyright-infringement-india-ai-digital-piracy-litigation-guide\/\">Learn copyright infringement laws in India. <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/copyright-infringement-faqs-india\/\">50 Copyright Infringement FAQs in India (2026) <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/how-to-file-copyright-infringement-case-india\/\">How to File a Copyright Infringement Case in India (2026) <\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/copyright-infringement-suit-india-complete-guide\/\">Learn how to file a copyright infringement suit in India, preserve evidence, secure injunctions, claim damages, and protect your copyright<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Cipla Limited vs. Union of India &amp; Ors.: Trademark Restoration, Renewal, and Third-Party Rights Introduction The procedural mechanics governing trademark restoration and renewal often present intricate questions regarding the locus standi of third parties. When a registered trademark is removed from the register due to non-renewal and subsequently restored by the Trade Marks Registry following<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","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":[5873],"tags":[5969],"class_list":["post-29152","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-trademark-law","tag-trademark-laws"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v28.1 (Yoast SEO v28.2) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Delhi High Court rules third parties have no locus standi in trademark restoration &amp; renewal writs. Key takeaways from the Cipla NO DARAR judgment.\" \/>\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\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Delhi High Court rules third parties have no locus standi in trademark restoration &amp; renewal writs. Key takeaways from the Cipla NO DARAR judgment.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-08-05T05:27:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-08-05T05:41:55+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=\"8 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\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305\"},\"headline\":\"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-05T05:27:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-08-05T05:41:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1639,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Trademark Laws\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Trademark Laws\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-05T05:27:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-08-05T05:41:55+00:00\",\"description\":\"The Delhi High Court rules third parties have no locus standi in trademark restoration & renewal writs. Key takeaways from the Cipla NO DARAR judgment.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Intellectual Property > Trademark Restoration is Strictly Bilateral: Delhi High Court Rejects Third-Party Impleadment in Cipla Case\"}]},{\"@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":"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"The Delhi High Court rules third parties have no locus standi in trademark restoration & renewal writs. Key takeaways from the Cipla NO DARAR judgment.","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\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained","og_description":"The Delhi High Court rules third parties have no locus standi in trademark restoration & renewal writs. Key takeaways from the Cipla NO DARAR judgment.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-08-05T05:27:13+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-08-05T05:41:55+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/"},"author":{"name":"ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/96ae33c2330691e5b3ccd88cf127a305"},"headline":"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained","datePublished":"2026-08-05T05:27:13+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-05T05:41:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/"},"wordCount":1639,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"keywords":["Trademark Laws"],"articleSection":["Trademark Laws"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/","name":"Delhi HC: No Third-Party Rights in Trademark Restoration \u2013 Cipla NO DARAR Case Explained - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-08-05T05:27:13+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-05T05:41:55+00:00","description":"The Delhi High Court rules third parties have no locus standi in trademark restoration & renewal writs. Key takeaways from the Cipla NO DARAR judgment.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/delhi-hc-cipla-no-darar-trademark-restoration-third-party-locus-standi\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Intellectual Property > Trademark Restoration is Strictly Bilateral: Delhi High Court Rejects Third-Party Impleadment in Cipla Case"}]},{"@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\/29152","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=29152"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29152\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":29320,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29152\/revisions\/29320"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29152"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29152"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29152"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}