Delhi District Court
Sant Nirankari Mandal(Regd) vs Nirankari Dham And Ors on 19 September, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANIL KUMAR SISODIA DISTRICT
JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)-04, CENTRAL, TIS HAZARI
COURTS, DELHI
CS DJ/5992/2018
SANT NIRANKARI MANDAL(REGD)
Address: Having office at Administrative Block,
Nirankari Complex, Burari Road,
Delhi-110009 .... Plaintiff
VERSUS
1.NIRANKARI DHAM Address: Through Shri Anurag Tanha, Flat No. 14, Upper Ground Floor, Khasra No. 656/1, Village GHITTORNI, NEW DELHI-110030
2. SH. ANURAG VARSHANEY TAHNA S/O SHRI NAROTTAM DAS VARSHANEY R/O H.NO. A-545 STREET NO. 7 JAITPUR EXTENSION PART-2, JAITPUR DELHI-110044 ALSO AT SHOP NO. 2 KHASRA NO. 405 OPP. METRO PILLAR NO. 120 NEAR HANUMAN MANDIR MG ROAD GHITTORNI NEW DELHI-110030
3. SHRI DALJEET SINGH S/O SHRI BAHADUR SINGH R/O PLOT NO. 47, SECTOR-14 KUKSHET GAON NERUL NAVI MUMBAI NERUL NODE-III THANE, MAHARASHTRA-400706
4. SMT. RENU GUPTA Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:54:28 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.1 by 47 W/O SH. ANURAG TANHA R/O 656/1, FLAT NO. A-2, UGF SUBHAM APARTMENT NEAR TALAB GHITTORNI NEW DELHI-110030
5. SH. MOHIT GUPTA S/O SHRI VISHNU GUPTA R/O H-132, BLOCK -H, HARKESH NAGAR SOUTH DELHI-110020
6. MS. VIJAY KUMARI R/O PLOT NO. 47 SECTOR-14 KUKSHET GAON NERUL NAVI MUMBAI NERU NODE-III THANE, MAHARASHTRA-400706
7. MS. MINAKSHI D/O SH. DIWAN SINGH BHORA R/O 1/64-A, BLOCK -I PREM NAGAR-II KIRARI SULEMAN NAGAR SULTANPURI, C-BLOCK, DELHI-110086
8. MRS. PUKHRAJ KAUR KHURANA C/O TARMEINDER SINGH KHURANA R/O 3/253, VANDANA BUILDING SHER-E-PUNJAB CHGS LTD MAHAKALI CAVES ROAD MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA-400093
9. SHRI SHOBHIT TRIPATHI SHOP NO. 5 BRENTFORD BUILDING HIRANANDANI ESTATES THANE, MAHARASHTRA-400608 .... Defendants Date of filing of the suit : 29.08.2018 Date of reserving judgment : 04.09.2025 Date of judgment : 19.09.2025 Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:54:36 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.2 by 47 Judgment
1. This is a suit for damages, passing off, infringement, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction filed by plaintiff against the defendants.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the plaintiff is a religious and socio-spiritual society registered since 1948 having its headquarter at Delhi and branches throughout India and abroad. Plaintiff preaches the concept of One Formless God (Nirankar) and believes that God can be realized only through the grace of the living Satguru (True Master). The plaintiff since its inception is engaged in achieving the aims and objects as enshrined in its Memorandum of Association.
3. It is stated that the plaintiff is an organizational set up of Sant Nirankari Mission which was started in 1929 at Peshawar (Pakistan) by his Holiness Baba Buta Singh Ji Maharaj, to impart and spread the message to the humanity about the Fatherhood of Formless God (Nirankar). With passage of time, Sant Nirankari Mission's popularity increased amongst the masses manifold and in 1948, it was registered as "Sant Nirankari Mandal" under the The Societies Registration Act, 1860.
It is further stated that the plaintiff society is having about 3000 branches in India and 270 branches in foreign countries with millions of followers.
4. The plaintiff has established large number of places of worship under the name and style of "Sant Nirankari Satsang Bhawan" and there are about 1000 Nirankari Bhavans across India, where daily/periodical satsangs are being held. The religious and spiritual head of the plaintiff Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:54:44 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.3 by 47 are commonly known by public as 'Nirankari Baba Ji' and 'Nirankari Mata Ji.' The annual congregation i.e. Sant Nirankari Samagam is being held at Delhi since 1948 and similar congregations are being organized at regional level in different parts of country. The plaintiff has established a holy pond in Delhi within its well-developed park under the name Nirankari Sarovar which has been recognized by Department of Tourism Government of NCT of Delhi as Tourist spot. The plaintiff has been publishing a monthly magazine/newsletter under the name and style of "SANT NIRANKARI' since 1948. This magazine is published in 11 languages having monthly circulation of 2,44,265.
5. In order to achieve its object of propagating its message, plaintiff has been hosting a website by the name of www.nirankari.org since 1996-1997 which is browsed by millions of people. The plaintiff is running charitable schools, dispensaries, hospitals, sewing and embroidery centers and colleges all over India besides providing monetary help to the students of weaker section through various scholarship schemes. It is stated that the word 'NIRANKARI' has been prominently incorporated in the name and style of plaintiff and its institutions, has attained exclusivity and is identified with the plaintiff. The plaintiff has also been using its logo, wherein a globe is shown in between two hands (picture of the logo) and the same is identified by the general public at large.
6. The members of the plaintiff are popularly known as Nirankari and the vicinity of the headquarter of the plaintiff society is known as 'Nirankari Colony' and a prominent crossing near its headquarter on the outer ring road of Delhi is called as 'Nirankari Chowk.' The telegrams addressed by anyone to 'Nirankari' shall be automatically delivered by Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:54:52 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.4 by 47 Post and Telegraph Department at the plaintiff's headquarter. Thus, the government also recognizes that the word 'Nirankari' exclusively belongs to plaintiff society.
7. It is further stated that the plaintiff is known for its charitable activities such as blood donation camps and plaintiff has been awarded Special Consultative Status by UNO to participate intimately in their work, in particular ECOSOC. The name Sant Nirankari Mandal having the word Nirankari as prominent part is exclusively recognized by the UNO with the plaintiff.
8. Due to a manifold increase in the activities of the plaintiff, members of the plaintiff formed sister society in the name and style of "Sant Nirankari Charitable Foundation" in April 2010 which is performing charitable activities such as establishing and running hospitals, education institutions, tree plantation, cleanliness drive etc. The plaintiff has registered domain names www.nirankari.com and www.nirankari.org since 1996-97. The sister society of the plaintiff also registered domain name www.nirankarifoundation.org since 2010-11 and large number of people are browsing the said website and identifying the same with the plaintiff. The plaintiff applied for registration of its name "Sant Nirankari Mandal" was registered as Trade Mark No.03165916 under class 41, 45 and 16 as User since 24.09.1948.
9. It is stated that defendant no. 1 is purportedly a registered trust incorporated by defendant nos. 2 to 8, who are responsible for its day-to- day affairs. Defendant no. 2 is purportedly claiming himself as Head/Chairman of defendant no. 1 and has been spreading its name to usurp goodwill of plaintiff has been asking the general public including Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:00 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.5 by 47 the devotees of plaintiff to donate money to them instead of plaintiff. It is stated that defendant no. 2 used to serve as poet with plaintiff and is well aware of the activities and goodwill of the plaintiff. Defendant nos. 3 to 8 are also aware of the activities of the plaintiff and its goodwill having participated in the activities of the plaintiff.
10. Defendant no. 9 in his YouTube channel exhorted the follower of plaintiff to form Nirankari Dham. Defendant no. 2 is also circulated defamatory messages in various social media platforms including WhatsApp under the name and style of Nirankari Dham. Defendant no. 2 in his messages is claiming that defendant no. 1 is carrying on activities similar to that of plaintiff and defendants are deceptively and falsely using the name "Nirankari Dham" despite having no connection with the plaintiff and have been claiming a domain name under the name www.nirankaridham.com which is deceptively similar to the registered domain name of the plaintiff and have further created an email ID:
[email protected]. The photographs and video circulated by defendant no. 2 predominantly displayed the photographs of plaintiff's earlier religious and spiritual head Satguru Baba Hardev Singh Ji. It was stated that Baba Hardev Singh Ji, during his lifetime prohibited the display of his photographs or hailing his name in any Satsang or programme unless it is permitted by the plaintiff. It was further submitted that Satguru Baba Hardev Singh Ji as well as all the earlier religious and spiritual heads as well as the present religious and spiritual are an integral part of the plaintiff's activities. It was stated that the defendant no. 2 with ulterior motive has prominently displayed the photograph of Satguru Baba Hardev Singh Ji and the name Nirankari prefixed to Dham, so as to hold out that it is Nirankari. The defendants in their programme have displayed disparaging banners asking to stop Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:08 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.6 by 47 making donations to the plaintiff and are making hurtful remarks against the plaintiff to incite violence inside and outside Nirankari community. The defendants are also engaged in religious and spiritual activities with the photographs of Satguru Baba Hardev Singh Ji and the said activities are not permitted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff has been receiving donations for its activities and spending them in carrying out its aims and objects. The defendants have predominantly used the name Nirankari in their tradename "Nirankari Dham" to induce the belief of general public and more particularly following of the plaintiff, most of whom are from rural and semi-urban regions with low education. The defendant is trying to hold out the general public as devotee of Satguru Baba Hardev Singh Ji to deceive innocent citizens, apart from injuring the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff. It was stated that the activities are run by the defendant under the name of 'Nirankari Dham' for conducting fraudulent activities and defendants have been passing off its activities as that of plaintiff and are thus, cheating the general public. The defendants are using deceptively similar name as that of plaintiff for their personal use and benefits and are eating into the goodwill of the plaintiff. It was further stated that defendants are liable to pay damages for unauthorizedly, without permission of the plaintiff using deceptively similar name as that of the plaintiff.
11. The defendants were duly served with the summons of the suit. Although, defendants nos. 1 to 8 have filed their separate written statements, however, perusal of the written statements filed by the defendants would show that all the defendants have taken the same defence in their WS. It is also pertinent to note that during the pendency of the suit, defendant nos. 3, 6 and 8 settled the disputes with the plaintiff vide separate statements dated 29.11.2022 and accordingly, the Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:16 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.7 by 47 suit was disposed of as settled in terms of Memorandum of Settlement between the parties and consent decree was passed qua defendant nos. 3, 6 and 8. The name of defendant no. 9 was deleted from the array of parties on the no-objection given by the counsel for the plaintiff for deletion of his name. Accordingly, vide order dated 18.01.2020, name of defendant no. 9 was deleted from the array of parties. Defendant nos. 4, 5 and 7 were proceeded exparte vide order dated 16.05.2024. Defendant no. 2 also expired on 21.04.2025 during the pendency of the suit at the stage of final arguments.
12. In their WS, defendant nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 have raised preliminary objections that the suit of the plaintiff is without cause of action and plaintiff has not approached the court with clean hands and has concealed material facts. The suit is hopelessly barred by limitation, suit has not been framed as per the High Court Rules, suit is undervalued, is a misuse of legal provisions and has been filed to harass the defendants.
It has been stated that plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit as the Mission originated from Nirankari movement started by Baba Dayal Singh and has been targeted by Orthodox Sikh Groups from time to time. In 1929, one segment of the movement led by Baba Buta Singh disassociated itself from the original Nirankari movement and became independent society. It was further stated that the word "Nirankari" is not originated or discovered by the plaintiff rather the founder of the plaintiff had taken the word from the Nirankari movement which had taken the word from "Guru Granth Sahib" and changed it to Sant Nirankari Mandal. The plaintiff has no exclusivity on the word "Nirankari." "Sri Nirankari Darbar" was opened by Baba Dayal Singh in the 19th century with logo of globe which has been copied by the Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:24 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.8 by 47 plaintiff. It was further stated that the word "Nirankar" has its roots in the sanskrit word "Nirakara" and is used as a name for the Almighty in Guru Granth Sahib which describes God as formless and omnipresent. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Freudenberg Gala Household Product Pvt. Ltd. Vs. GEBI Products and judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Registrar of Trademarks Vs. Ashok Chandra Rakhit Ltd. It was submitted that no party can have monopoly over the usage of name of God as a trademark and further, where a label is registered as a whole, such registration cannot give the proprietor exclusive statutory right over any particular word or name contained therein. It was stated that plaintiff cannot claim protection against the word "Nirankari" which is one of the words in the name of the plaintiff's society and there is no question of infringement thereof by the defendant. It was further stated that the word 'Satguru' or 'Sadguru' means the true guru. It was submitted that the ideology of the plaintiff and defendant is totally different as the plaintiff's ideology is to follow and worship the living Satguru whereas ideology of defendants is to follow the teachings and preachings of their true Satguru Baba Hardev Singh Ji and not to worship any living Satguru. It was further stated that defendants under Article 26 of the constitution have the freedom to manage religious affairs. The plaintiff under the garb of the present suit is trying to pressurize the defendant no. 2 to withdraw his case which was filed by him against the plaintiff and against Mata Savinder Kaur and other committee members of the plaintiff after defendant no. 2 discovered corruption being committed by them.
On merits, the contents of the plaint were denied in part. It was admitted that plaintiff is preaching the systematic way of life based on self-realization through God realization but it was denied that members of plaintiff were popularly known as "Nirankari" or that the word Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:35 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.9 by 47 "Nirankari" is exclusively identified with the plaintiff. It was admitted that defendant no. 2 is the chairman of defendant no. 1 and defendants nos. 3 to 8 were aware about the activities of plaintiff, having participated therein. It was stated that defendant no. 2 is the follower of Baba Hardev Singh Ji. It was further stated that defendant no. 2 came to know that Baba Hardev Singh Ji did not die in a car accident in Canada but he was murdered and thereafter the incident of accident was planted. Defendant no. 2 also came to know about corruption in the plaintiff's society and when he tried to approach the higher authorities, he was shocked that the Higher authorities offered him bribe to remain silent. It was further stated that defendant no. 2 had told defendant no. 9 about registration of Nirankari Dham and only thereafter defendant no. 9 had published information on his YouTube channel. It was also submitted that the domain name www.nirankaridham.com was not similar to that of plaintiff's domain name nor the e-mail Id of defendant no. 1 was similar to that of plaintiff. It was further admitted that defendant no. 2 had circulated the photographs as well as video to spread his activities displaying the photographs of Baba Hardev Singh Ji. It was denied that defendants were making disparaging remarks against the plaintiff with an ulterior motive to usurp its goodwill. Other contents of the plaint were denied and a prayer was made for dismissal of the plaint.
13. Plaintiff filed replication to the WS of defendant no. 1 denying the contents of the WS contrary to the plaint and reiterated the facts stated in the plaint. It was stated that defendants are misrepresenting the general public at large as true Nirankaris and successor of Baba Hardev Singh Ji, who was the Satguru of the plaintiff for 36 years, in order to cause confusion amongst the public and devotees of the plaintiff. It was further stated that admittedly defendant no. 1 was registered as a trust in July Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:43 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.10 by 47 2018, whereas plaintiff started as Sant Nirankari Mission in 1929 and a registered society as Sant Nirankari Mandal in 1948. It was stated that defendants are trying to illegally pass off their activities under the garb of identical and similar name and lots of people are getting confused and deceived by the defendants. It was further stated that defendant no. 1 organized programmes at Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad and advertised the same as "Nirankari Satsang" and displayed photographs of Baba Hardev Singh. The conduct of the defendant is contrary to the basic tenets of the Nirankari Mission and they are well aware about the proprietary rights of plaintiff in the term/word/name "Nirankari" and the reputation accrued thereto. It was further stated that plaintiff is not claiming that it originated the word "Nirankari," rather, it has attained secondary meaning due to long association with the plaintiff and plaintiff has exclusive right on the word "Nirankari" which has acquired distinctive meaning in association with the objects and activities of the plaintiff. Other contents of the WS have been denied and a prayer has been made for decreeing the present suit.
14. Vide order dated 11.12.2018, an injunction application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC was allowed and defendants were restrained from using the word/name "Nirankari" or any deceptively similar word, mark or logo etc. as part of their name or identity till the disposal of the suit. Defendants were also prohibited from using the photographs of spiritual heads of the plaintiff's society, so as to project themselves as being associated to them.
15. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 02.04.2024: -
Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:55:52 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.11 by 47
1. Whether the plaintiff has not come to court with clean hands and has suppressed the material facts? (OPD)
2. Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit? (OPD)
3. Whether the present suit is a counter blast to the suit filed by defendant no. 2 titled as "Anurag Tanha Vs. Mata Savinder Kaur and Anr." pending in Rohini Courts? (OPD)
4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of damages to the sum of Rs.1 Crore along with interest, as prayed for? (OPP)
5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the decree of permanent injunctions as prayed for? (OPP)
6. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree of mandatory injunction, as prayed for? (OPP)
7. Relief.
16. The plaintiff has examined Dr. Praveen Khullar, Secretary (HQ) as PW-1 in support of their case, who has tendered her affidavit as Ex PW1/A and proved the following documents: -
Sr. Document Exhibit
No.
1 Minutes of meeting dated Ex.PW-1/1
11.03.2024 (OSR)
2 Memorandum of Association Ex. PW-1/2
3 Copy of certificate of registration Ex.PW-1/3
(OSR)
Digitally
signed by
ANIL ANIL KUMAR
SISODIA
KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19
14:55:59
+0530
CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.12 by 47
4 Letter issued by Tourism Ex. PW-1/4
Department, GNCT, Delhi
5 Copy of Sant Nirankari Magazine Ex.PW-1/5
with RNI number /letter (OSR)
6 Copy of recognition letters issued Ex.PW1/6
by Education Department (colly)
regarding Sant Nirankari School
and college, printout of website
7 Booklet / printed material Ex.PW1/7
showing Charitable activities and (colly) printout of website:
nikrankari.org 8 Copies of appreciation letters in Ex.PW1/8 favour of plaintiff issued by (colly) (OSR) foreign countries 9 Logo Ex.PW1/9 10 Copies of appreciation / approval Ex.PW1/10 letter issued by Govt. Dept. (Colly) is de-
exhibited and Mark A-5 11 Copy of letter by UNO granting Ex.PW1/11 Special as well as General (Colly) Consultative status with ECOSOC 12 Registration Certificate and Ex.PW1/12 Memorandum of Association and (Colly) Order u/s 80(G) of I.T. Act 1961.
website : nirankarifoundation.org 13 Copies of members of Whatsapp Ex.PW1/13 group 'Nikrankari Dham' and (colly) 'Sant Nirankari Dham' and messages circulated by defendant no.2 and Ors.
14 Transcripts regarding Nirankari Ex.PW1/14 Dham on YouTube channel Lifex (Colly) episode of defendant no.9 15 Transcripts of Ravinder Singh Ex.PW1/15 News Nirankari Mandal and (Colly) Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:56:07 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.13 by 47 Nirankari Dham
16 Affidavit cum certificate u/s 65-B ExPW1/16 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 17 Copy of Assessment order AY Ex.PW1/17 2016-17 issued by Income Tax (colly) Department 18 Certified copy of Judgment dated Ex.PW1/18 28.09.2016 in suit no.
CS59409/2016
19 Media Clippings, News papers Mark A-1
(colly)
20 List of Socio-Medical Activities Mark A-2
as on 31.03.2018 (Colly)
(wrongly
mentioned as
A-3 in
affidavit
Ex.PW1/A.
21 Copy of Trade Mark registration Mark A-
issued by Authority 3(colly)
(wrongly
mentioned as
A-4 in
affidavit
Ex.PW1/A.
PW-1 was cross examined by counsel for the defendant no. 1 and
17. In her cross-examination, she deposed that the plaintiff has filed the present suit for protection of its word/trademark "Nirankari". She admitted that in the prayer clause plaintiff has prayed for 'Sant Nirankari Mandal' (Regd.). She denied the suggestion that Sant Nirankari Mandal has originated from Nirankari movement. She further denied the suggestion that she was not sure as to the protection of which trademark the present suit was filed by the plaintiff. She admitted that the word "Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.)" has been registered as a Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:56:15 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.14 by 47 label/trademark as a whole. She admitted that there is no document on record to show that word "Nirankari" has been registered as a trademark and volunteered that it has been registered as a label mark in different connotation. She deposed that the word "Nirankari" has been coined by the plaintiff but there is no document on record to establish this fact. She also deposed that the plaintiff has not claimed monopoly over the word "Nirankar." She further deposed that plaintiff is not a charitable organization and the donations are the only source of income of the plaintiff. She further deposed that plaintiff has used "Nirankari" and present suit has been filed for the protection of the said word. She also deposed that plaintiff has claimed monopoly over the logo of Sant Nirankari Mandal in the present suit. She denied the suggestion that plaintiff follow the ideology of worshiping the living Satgurus only and further deposed that the present suit was filed by the plaintiff as devotee of Nirankari Mission were confused due to the use of word "Nirankari" by the defendants. PW-1 also admitted that there are number of shops using the name of "Nirankari" as their trademarks and volunteered that she was only aware about Nirankari Jewellers. PW-1 admitted that these shops are not part of the plaintiff's organization and further admitted that the word "Nirankari" is common word. PW-1 deposed that Memorandum of Association mentions about the prohibition of use of the photographs of Satgurus and again said that there is no such rule which prohibits the use of photographs of Satgurus.
18. Plaintiff also examined PW-2 Sh. Sh. Purshottam Lal and PW-3 Sh. Vinod Kumar, who have tendered their affidavit by way of evidence as Ex.PW-2/A and Ex.PW-3/A to establish that these witnesses were confused/deceived by the activities of the defendants using the word "Nirankari" and photographs of Satguru Baba Hardev Singh.
Digitally signed
by ANIL
ANIL KUMAR
KUMAR SISODIA
Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19
14:56:24 +0530
CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.15 by 47
In their cross-examination, PW-2 admitted that he was living in Nirankari Satsang Bhawan, Shahdara along with his parents from 1973 to1999 and his father was granted accommodation for performing his services. He deposed that he was Vice Chairman of Sant Nirankari Public School, Malviya Nagar, which was being run by the plaintiff. He further admitted that he attended the Satsang in Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad along with his son and he saw the photographs of Baba Hardev Singh placed on the dais. After the Satsang, he met one Jai Prakash and was surprised to see the banner of Nirankari Dham over the stage and on his enquiry, Jai Prakash told him that it was started by defendant no. 2 Anurag Tanha and he had informed this fact in this Mandal. He denied the suggestion that he never attended the Satsang at Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad. He further deposed that he had received phone call from defendant no. 2 but had no proof of the same. He further deposed that defendant no. 2 used to tell him that Baba had given him responsibility of Mission after his demise.
PW-3 in his cross-examination also deposed that he had not attended the Satsang prior to the death of Baba Hardev Singh. He deposed that he had attended the Satsang organized by defendant no. 1 at Ghitorni near Mehrauli in the year 2017 when he had gone to Mehrauli to drop a passenger. He deposed that he was not told that Satsang was organized by defendant no. 1 but he was told that it was 'Nirankari Satsang.' He further deposed that he knew defendant no. 2 and came to know about defendant no. 2 as he started receiving the messages and videos of defendant no. 2 after his number was shared in the Satsang. He deposed that he could not differentiate between the programme organized by the plaintiff and defendant no. 1 as he had only attended the one programme of defendant no. 1. He further deposed that he had offered money in the programme at Ghitorni at the time of Namaskar but Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:56:40 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.16 by 47 did not obtain any receipt of the same. He denied the suggestion that he did not offer any money or attended any programme of defendant no.1. He denied the suggestion that no Satsang was held in Ghitorni.
PW-4 Sh. Rohit Maan, Junior Assistant, Firm & Society (HQ) District North, Alipur, Delhi-110036 has brought the registration certificate of the plaintiff society and Sant Nirankari Charitable Foundation in the digital form. The same has been retrieved from IT Branch, Revenue Head Quarter, 5 Sham Nath Marg, Delhi. Thereafter, PE was closed.
19. Defendant examined Sh. Anurag Varshney as DW-1, who has tendered his affidavit as Ex DW-1/A and he relied upon the following documents.
Sr. Document Exhibit
No.
1 Copy of Trust Deed dated 18.07.2018 Ex. DW-1/1
(OSR)
2 Copies of printout of the Headquarter of Ex. DW-1/2
the original Sikh sect founded by Baba (Objected to Dayal Singh Ji in 19th Century mode of proof) 3 Certificate u/s 65-B of the Indian Ex. DW-1/3 Evidence Act 4 Copies of pages of Shri Guru Granth Mark A Sahib 5 Copies of photographs of the donations Ex. DW-1/4 made by the Nirankari Dham (colly) (Objected to mode of proof) 6 Copies of the photographs of the events Mark B conducted by the plaintiff Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:56:48 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.17 by 47 DW-1 was cross-examined by the counsel for the plaintiff. In his cross-examination, DW-1 deposed that he was a sewadar in the plaintiff society and he was also appointed as sub-editor in the publication department by Babaji. He denied the suggestion that he used to get maintenance allowance from the plaintiff society and volunteered that he used to get Rs.250/- 350/- which he used to keep under the impression that the same were given by Babaji. He further volunteered that in 1985 he left the said work. He further deposed that he had attended all the Nirankari samagams from 1979 till 1985 and he used to recite poems in Nirankari Samagam and Satsang. He admitted that he used to reside in Nirankari Kothi situated in Nirankari colony for a long time. He admitted that after 1990, Nirankari Samagams have been organized in Nirankari Maidan near Burari Chowk. He also admitted that criminal complaint filed by him against Mata Savinder Kaur had been dismissed. He admitted that he had not filed any revision or appeal against the dismissal of the said complaint nor he approached the trial court for revival of the complaint and volunteered that he came to know about the dismissal belatedly. DW-1 further admitted that he has not filed any complaint against his counsel in the criminal case in any forum. He denied the suggestion that there is no such advocate by the name of Pawan Prakash. DW-1 also admitted that he had no blood relations with Baba Hardev Singh Ji and he was not authorized by Baba Hardev Singh Ji to use his photographs in public functions and volunteered that he had not asked for the authority as he was Satguru and every one was using his photograph. DW-1 admitted that after demise of Baba Hardev Singh Ji, neither his wife nor his daughter had given any authority to him to use the photographs of public functions. He also admitted that plaintiff society has also not given any authority to him to use the photographs of Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:56:57 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.18 by 47 Baba Hardev Singh Ji for public function. He denied the suggestion that on his instructions, satsangs were organized at Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad and Ghitorni near Mehrauli and volunteered that no satsang was organized in Ghitorni and public service work was organized in hospital in Vijay Nagar, Ghazibad. He admitted that nirankaris do not believe in idol worship. He denied the suggestion that defendant no.1 trust was created to grab the goodwill of plaintiff society. He also denied the suggestion that the word "Nirankari" had attained secondary meaning with the plaintiff society or that the public associates the plaintiff society with the word "Nirankari."
20. DW-2 Baba Jagdarshan Singh Nirankari was examined through the Ld. Local Commissioner on an application filed by the defendant nos. 1 and 2. DW-2 tendered his affidavit by way of evidence as Ex DW2/A and additional affidavit by way of evidence as Ex. DW-
2/B. As per his affidavit "Nirankari Darbar" belongs to Nirankari sect which was founded by Baba Dayal. Initially the Nirankari Darbar was established at Rawal Pindi but after partition it was re-established at Chandigarh by Baba Hara Singh. He deposed that there are two Nirankari groups, Asli Nirankaris founded by Baba Dayal Ji and Nakli Nirankaris term referred to Sant Nirankari Mandal. He deposed that there is no connection of plaintiff society with Nirankari Darbar and plaintiff is not the originator of Nirankari movement and cannot claim monopoly over the word "Nirankari". He further deposed that word "Nirankari" is a common word and is name of the God referred to in various religious texts such as Guru Granth Sahib and the word "Satguru" means the true Guru. He also deposed that defendants are the followers of preachings of Baba Hardev Singh Ji, whom they worship as God and the plaintiff cannot claim monopoly over the photos or name of Baba Hardev Singh Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:06 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.19 by 47 Ji. DW-2 also proved the photographs of the Nirankari Darbar functioning way back since 18th Century is exhibited as Ex.DW-2/1A (colly) and copy of photograph showcasing gathering of Sri Nirankari Darbar under the chair of Third Guru Shri Sahib Ratta Ji at Nirankari Darbar at Rawalpindi (Pakistan) of the year 1896 from the book titled as 'Nirankari' published on 13th January, 1931 with the publisher named as 'Youngman Nirankari Association' is exhibited as Ex.DW-2/1B.
DW-2 was cross-examined by counsel for plaintiff and in his cross- examination, DW-2 deposed that there is only one head quarter of Nirankari Darbar situated at Chandigarh. The witness deposed that he has no knowledge as to how many Nirankari Satsang Bhawan are there at Chandigarh. He also deposed that he had made websites many times but it was hacked by the plaintiff. The witness also produced flyer exhibited as Ex. DW-2/CE1 in support of his deposition. DW-2 denied the suggestion that contents of para 3, para 6 (portion A1 to A2) and para 7 (portion A3 to A4) of his affidavit are false. He also denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely at the behest of the defendants. Thereafter, DE was closed.
21. I have heard Sh. Sanjay Jain, Ld. Sr. Advocate and Sh. K.K. Selopal, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff and Sh. Yuganshu Sharma, Ld. Counsel for defendant nos. 1 and 2 and have perused the record carefully including the written submissions filed by them. Counsel for the plaintiff has also placed reliance on following judgments: -
1. South India Beverage vs. General Mills Marketing, 2014 SCC OnLine Del 1953
2. Bennet Coleman and Company Ltd. vs. Fashion One Television LLC and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8083 Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:16 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.20 by 47
3. Bennet Coleman and Company Limited vs. Vnow Technologies Private Limited and Another, 2023 SCC Online Del 864
4. Triumphant Institute of Management Education Private Limited vs. Times Coaching Centre, 2022 SCC Online Del 3409
5. Living Media India Ltd. vs. Aabtak Channel.com (John Does), 2023 SCC Online Del 5680
6. A.O. Smith Corp. vs. Star Smith Export (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC Online Del 2199
7. Leeford Healthcare Ltd. vs. Vobb Healthcare, 2023 SCC Online Del 2386
8. HT Media Ltd. vs. Hindustan News Network, 2024 SCC Online Del 2594
9. Monster Energy Co. vs. Vineet Deshwal Trading as Radha Krishna Enterprises, 2023 SCC Online Del 5471
10. Mankind Pharma Ltd. vs. Ram Kumar, 2025 SCC Online Del 5604
11. Amar Singh Chawal Wala v. Shree Vardhman Rice and Genl. Mills, 2009 SCC Online Del 1690
12. Anshul Vaish vs. Hari Om & Co., 2025 SCC Online Del 664
13. Pidilite Industries Ltd. vs. Dubond products India (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC Online Bom 1390
14. Midas Hygiene Industries (P) Ltd. v. Sudhir Bhatia, (2004) 3 SCC 90 Bhagwan Dass Gupta vs. Shiv Shankar Tirath 2001 (59) DRJ 609
15. Mahendra & Mahendra Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:24 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.21 by 47 Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (2002) 2 SCC 147
16. Cothas Coffee vs. Cotha Associates ILR 2017 KAR 4927
17. Living Media India Limited vs. Jitender V Jain, 2002 SCC Online Del 605:
18. M/s Helpage India vs. M/s Helpage Garhwal, 2001 SCC OnLine Del 602:
19. Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma vs. Navratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories 1964 SCC Online SC 14:
20. T.V. Venugopal vs. Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. (2011) 4 SCC 85
21. Info Edge (India) Pvt. Ltd. And Anr. vs Shailesh Gupta and Anr. 98(2002) DLT499:
22. The British School Society vs The British International School, 2021 SCC Online Del 5210
23. Tata Sons Limited vs. Aniket Singh, 2015 SCC Online Del 13728
24. Titan Industries Ltd. vs. Ramkumar Jewellers, 2012 SCC Online Del 2382
25. Anil Kapoor vs. simply Life India, 2023 SCC Online Del 6914
26. Arijit Singh vs. Codible Ventures LLP, 2024 SCC Online Bom 2445
27. Sunil Mittal vs. Darzi on Call, 2017 SCC Online Del 7934
28. Insecticides (India) Ltd. vs. Parijat Industries (India) (P) Ltd. 2018 SCC Online Del 9748
29. Laxmibai V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah, (2002) 3 SCC Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:32 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.22 by 47 65
30. S. Syed Mohideen v. P. Sulochana Bai, (2016) 2 SCC 683
31. Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. Novakind Bio Sciences (P) Ltd., (2023) 4 HCC (Del) 320
32. Living Media India Ltd. v. Aabtak Channel. Com (John Does), 2023 SCC Online Del 5680
33. Anshul Vaish v. Hari Om & Co., 2025 SCC Online Del 664
34. A.O. Smith Corpn. V. Star Smith Export (P) Ltd., 2024 SCC Online Del 2199
35. Amar Singh Chawal Wala v. Shree Vardhman Rice and Genl. Mills, 2009 SCC Online Del 1690
36. Suo Motu Proceedings v. Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, 2013 SCC Online Ker 24367
37. Laltu Ghosh v. State of W.B., 2013 15 SCC 344
38. State of U.P. v. Kishanpal, (2008) 16 SCC 73 Counsel for the defendant has also placed reliance on the following judgments: -
1. Khadi Village Industries Commission vs. Registrar of Trademarks 2025 SCC Online Bom 179
2. Subway IP LLC vs. Infinity Food & Ors.
2023:DHC:269
3. JR Kapoor v. Micronix India (1994) Suppl. 3 SCC 215:
4. F. hoffman La Roche & Co. Ltd. vs. Geoffrey Manners & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1969) 2 SCC 716: Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:40 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.23 by 47
5. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Grasim Industries Ltd. vs. Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. (Notice of Motion No. 76 of 2014 in Suit No. 42 of 2014 and Notice of Motion No. 910 of 2015 in Suit No. 37 of 2014 MANU/MH/0954/2016)
6. M/s Nav Jagriti Niketan Education Society vs. Delhi International School & Ors. 2019: DHC:1810
7. M/s Three-n-Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s Kairali Exports & Anr.: 2018: DHC:28
8. Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vasundhra Fashion Jewellery LLP and Anr. 2023: DHC:4960
9. M/s Bharat Biotech international Ltd. vs. Opival Health Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 2020: DHC:1977
10.Cadila Healthcare Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd. & Ors. (2008) ILR 1 Delhi 1242
11.Yatra Online Ltd. vs. Mach Conferences & Events Ltd (CS (Comm) 1099/2024)
12.Living Media India Ltd. & Anr vs. Alpha Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (2016: DHC:747-DB; or I.A. No. 21490/2012 in CS (OS) 3350/2012)
13.Om Logistics Ltd. vs. Sh. Mahendra Pandey, CS(COMM) 447/2021
14.Lal Babu Priyadarshi vs. Amritpal Singh AIR 2016 SC 461
15.M/s Nandhini Deluxe vs. M/s Karnataka Co-
operative Milk Producers Ltd. 2018 INSC 642
16.Delhivery Pvt. Ltd. vs. Treasure Vase Ventures Pvt.
Digitally Ltd. ANIL signed by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:50 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.24 by 47
17.Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. D Sharma & Anr. CS (COMM) 609/2016
18.Novelty Emporium Vs. Novelty Creations Pvt. Ltd., MANU/DE/1483/2001
22. Issue wise findings on the basis of evidence and arguments are as under: -
Issue no. 1:
Whether the plaintiff has not come to court with clean hands and has suppressed the material facts? (OPD)
23. The onus of proving this issue has been cast upon the defendants. In the WS, defendants have raised preliminary objections that the plaintiff has not come to the court with clean hands and has been concealing true and material facts. However, in their entire WS, defendant nos. 1 and 2 have not disclosed as to what material facts have been concealed by the defendants. Defendants have only raised legal pleas that plaintiff cannot claim exclusive right on the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" which is a generic/descriptive word. However, non-mentioning of the same in the plaint would not amount to concealment of material facts. Even otherwise, defendant no. 2 in his evidence has also failed to disclose any such material fact which may disentitle the plaintiff from the discretionary relief of injunction. Accordingly, the issue is decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Issue no.2:
Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit? (OPD) ANIL Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:57:59 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.25 by 47
24. The onus to prove this issue has also been cast on the defendants. The defendants in their WS have taken a stand that plaintiff has no locus standi to proceed with the present case as the Nirankari movement began with the teachings of Baba Dayal Singh in early 19th century and in 1929, one segment of the movement led by Baba Buta Singh, now known as Nirankari Mission disassociated for itself from the original Nirankari movement as well as main stream Sikhism and became independent society. It was stated that the word "Nirankari" was not invented or discovered by the plaintiff but the same has been adopted from the holy book Guru Granth Sahib and changed the Nirankari movement to "Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd)." It was also stated that "Sri Nirankari Darbar" opened by Baba Dayal Singh is the original Nirankari movement.
25. Defendants have examined DW-2 Baba Jag Darshan Singh in support of their averments, who has testified on the lines of the defence taken by the defendants. However, it is pertinent to note here that it is not the claim of the DW-2 that he had ever objected to the use of the words "Nirankar/Nirankari" by the plaintiff or had filed any objections against registration of the trademarks of the plaintiff.
26. It may be mentioned here that the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for restraining the defendants for infringing/misusing name/trademark. It is not in dispute that plaintiff is the registered owner of 19 trademarks. Hence, the plaintiff only can file the suit for injunction and damages against the defendant for infringing their tradename/trademark and it cannot be said that plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit. Merely because there is another Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:58:07 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.26 by 47 organization/institution in the name of "Sri Nirankari Darbar," the plaintiff cannot be prevented exercising its statutory and common law rights for preventing the infringement of its tradename/trademarks. The issue is accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Issue no. 3:
Whether the present suit is a counter blast to the suit filed by defendant no. 2 titled as "Anurag Tanha Vs. Mata Savinder Kaur and Anr." pending in Rohini Courts? (OPD)
27. The onus of proving this issue has been cast on the defendants. The defendants, in their written statements have taken a plea that the present suit has been filed merely to harass the defendant. It is submitted that the plaintiff is trying to pressurize the defendant no. 2 to withdraw his case which he had filed against the Nirankari Mandal, and the case which the defendant no. 2 has filed against Mata Savinder Kaur herself and other committee members of Sant Nirankari Mandal. It is further submitted in the written statement filed by Defendant nos. 1 and 2 that the defendant no. 2 came to know about the fact that Baba Hardev Singh Ji had not died in a car accident rather was murdered. It was also stated in the WS that defendant no. 2 also came to know about corruption in the plaintiff society and misappropriation of funds by some family members and relative of Baba Hardev Singh Ji and when defendant no. 2 tried to approach the higher authorities, he was offered bribe in one or the other way. It has been stated that the present suit has been filed as a counter blast to the case filed by defendant no.2 titled as "Anurag Tanha Vs. Mata Savinder Kaur & Anr." which is pending in the court of Ld. MM at Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:58:17 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.27 by 47 District Court, Rohini.
Plaintiff in its replication has denied the allegations leveled by the defendants.
28. Defendant no. 2 appeared as DW-1 and filed evidence by way of affidavit Ex. DW-1/A, wherein he has reiterated the aforesaid facts. However, defendant did not prove the copy of the complaint case in his evidence nor examined any official from the concerned court to prove the said complaint. Rather, in his cross-examination, he admitted that the said criminal complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. filed by him had been dismissed for non-appearance. He also admitted that he had not filed any revision or appeal against the dismissal of the said complaint nor had approached trial court for revival of the complaint as he came to know about the dismissal belatedly. DW-2 also did not led any evidence to show as to how and by whom he had been pressurized to withdraw the said complaint. Thus, in the absence of any material on record, I am of the considered opinion that defendants have failed to discharge the onus cast on them. The issue is accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Issue nos. 5 and 6:
5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the decree of permanent injunctions as prayed for? (OPP)
6. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree of mandatory injunction, as prayed for? (OPP)
29. These issues are taken up together as they can be disposed of by common discussion. The onus of proving these issues has been cast upon the plaintiff. Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:58:25 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.28 by 47
30. The plaintiff has filed this suit seeking protection from infringement and passing off its registered trademarks. Ld. Sr. Advocate for the plaintiff has argued that the plaintiff is a socio, religious and charitable society which was registered in the year 1948 as "Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.)". The plaintiff society has as many as 17 trademarks registered in its name such as Sant Nirankari Mandal, Dhan Nirankar, Ek Tuhi Nirankar, Sant Nirankari Sewa Dal, Annual Nirankari Sant Samagam, Sant Nirankari Sarovar, Sant Nirankari Public School and Nirankari International Samagam etc. All the 17 registered trademarks bear the words "Nirankar" or "Nirankari". Thus, the dominant feature of the above wordmarks is "Nirankari" and the plaintiff is the prior user of these trademarks. It has further been argued that defendant no. 1 "Nirankari Dham" was registered as a trust in 2018 and defendant no. 2, who was earlier associated with the plaintiff society, has adopted the expression "Nirankari" only with the intention to take advantage of the goodwill and reputation of the registered trademarks of the plaintiff. It was further argued that plaintiff has acquired distinctiveness and absolute proprietary rights by virtue of long, extensive and uninterrupted use of the word "Nirankari/Nirankar". Ld. Sr. Advocate for the plaintiff argued that defendant no. 2 left the plaintiff society in or around 2016 and approximately after two years, he executed trust deed establishing defendant no. 1. It was argued that defendants have failed to provide any explanation why the wordmark "Nirankari" is being used by them.
Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the sole defence raised by the defendants is that the word "Nirankar" is generic and cannot be appropriated by anyone. He argued that the plaintiff has registered 17 trademarks in respect of various derivatives and combinations of Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:58:33 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.29 by 47 "Nirankari/Nirankar" giving rise to the family of trademarks. He argued that the words "Nirankari/Nirankar" have acquired a distinctive character by virtue of long and uninterrupted use by the plaintiff and have become capable of distinguishing the identity of plaintiff from any other person. Counsel for the plaintiff has placed reliance on the judgment of South India Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. General Mills Marketing 2014 SCC On- Line Delhi 1953 and Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. Vs. Fashion One Television LLC 2018 SCC On-Line Del 8083 as regards his arguments relating to dominant feature. As regards his submission on bad faith adoption by the defendants, counsel for the plaintiff placed reliance on the judgments of Midas Hygiene Inds. (P) Ltd. Vs. Sudhir Bhatia (2004) 3 SCC 90; Bhagwan Dass Gupta Vs. Shiv Shankar Tirath Yatra Company 1993 (2001) DLT 406 and Cothas Coffee Vs. Cotha Associates 2017 SCC OnLine, KAR 4478.
Counsel for the plaintiff has further placed reliance on the judgment of Living Media India Ltd. Vs. Jitender V Jain 2002 SCC Online Del 605 as regards the plaintiff acquiring distinctiveness on the words "Nirankari/Nirankar" by virtue of long, prior and continuous use. It was argued that Hon'ble High Court in this judgment held that if it can be established that descriptive word or words has or have acquired among the public, or that class of public likely to deal with the business or goods in question, a subsidiary or secondary meaning denoting or connoting the business or the origin of the article, the person claiming to restrain the user of that word or those word can obtain the relief he seeks.
31. Counsel for the plaintiff also placed reliance upon M/s. Helpage India Vs. M/s. Helpage Garwal 2001 SCC Online Del 602; Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma Vs. Navratna Phamacetical Labortaries 1964 SCC Online SC 14; Mahendra & Mahendra Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:58:43 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.30 by 47 Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (2002) 2 SCC 147; TV Venugopal Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises Ltd. (2011) 4 SCC 85; Delhi Public School Society Vs. DPS Trust 2012 SCC Online Del 6234 and British School Society Vs. British International School 2021 SCC Online Delhi 5210 to argue that the generic words which have been in existence for long cannot be undermined by unauthorized use by their present or erstwhile follower on the pretext of such words being generic. It was argued that the use of the expression "Nirankari Dham" by the defendants is use of an identical trademark which is deceptively similar to the trademarks of the plaintiff in relation to the activities, partly similar to those of plaintiff which includes preaching and practicing a particular belief system without being permitted or authorized to do so, amounts to infringement of registered trademarks of the plaintiff which contain the wordmark "Nirankari". He further argued that defendants have also caused invasion of the rights of plaintiff in the domain names www.nirankari.org and www.nirankari.com.
32. Counsel for the plaintiff further argued that unauthorized use of photographs of the plaintiff's spiritual head by the defendants also amounts to infringement of "personality rights" which includes invasion of rights to the publicity and privacy. Counsel for the plaintiff placed reliance on the judgment of Tata Sons Ltd. Vs. Aniket Singh, 2015 SCC Online Del 13728; Titan Industries Ltd. Vs. Ram Kumar Jewellers 2012 SCC Online Del 2382; Anil Kapoor Vs. Simply Life India 2023 SCC Online Del 6914 and Arijit Singh Vs. Codible Ventures LLP 2024 SCC Online Bom 2445 in support of his arguments. He also argued that defendants are also using the registered trademark of plaintiff "Dhan Nirankar" in their WhatsApp messages.
Digitally signed
by ANIL
ANIL KUMAR
KUMAR SISODIA
Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19
14:58:54 +0530
CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.31 by 47
33. Counsel for defendant nos.1 and 2 has argued that defendant no.1 is a charitable trust which obtained registration through a trust deed with the desire to establish trust for public charitable objects. Defendant no. 2 is the chairman of the Trust. It was argued that the word "Nirankari" is a descriptive word which means a spiritual sect within Sikhism that be- lieves in one formless God. The name "Nirankari" comes from the word "Nirankar" which means "The formless one." It was argued that the pro- tection sought by the plaintiff over the word "Nirankari" is untenable as it is a generic word used since 1851 by various people, sects, and busi- ness enterprises. There are many shops in Delhi using the word "Ni- rankari." It was argued that a descriptive word and generic term such as "Nirankari" cannot be afforded protection under Sections 9 and 11 of the Trademarks Act. The word "Nirankar" has been taken from the Sri Guru Granth Sahib. The word has its roots in Sanskrit word "Nirakara" and is a compound of two words "Nir" meaning without and "Akar" meaning shape or form. It was argued that plaintiff has failed to prove that "Nirankari is exclusively associated with their institution only and has acquired secondary meaning and has not taken any legal action against other organization, who have been using the word "Nirankari" much prior to the plaintiff organization such as "Nirankari Darbar" established in 1851 or other brands using the similar name. In support of his arguments counsel for the defendant nos.1 and 2 has relied upon the judgments of JR Kapoor Vs. Micronix India 1994 Supp (3) SCC 215; F Hoffman La Roche & Co. Ltd. Vs. Geoffrey Manners & Co. Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1970 SC 2062; Living Media Ltd. Vs. Alpha Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.& Ors.2016 66 PTC 200 (Del) DB; Delhivery Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Treasure Vase Ventures Pvt. Ltd. MANU / DE / 1862 / 2020; Novelty Emporium Vs. Novelty Creations Pvt. Ltd. MANU/DE/1483/2001; M/s. Nandhini Deluxe Vs. M/s. Karnataka Co-operative Milk Producers Ltd. 2018 Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:59:02 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.32 by 47 INSC 642 to argue that generic terms and common words lack distinc- tiveness and cannot be monopolized and co-existence is possible. Coun- sel for the defendant no.1 and 2 also placed reliance on Lal Babu Priyadarshi Vs. Amrit Pal Singh AIR 2016 SC 461 to argue that reli- gious terms belong to the public and cannot be monopolized. Reliance was also placed on M/s Three-N-Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Kairali Exports 2018: DHC:28 to argue that extensive user alone cannot confer exclusivity without evidence of consumer perception.
34. Counsel for the defendants also argued that the word "Nirankari" has not been registered by the plaintiff and that too being a generic word which has become publici juris, the plaintiff is not entitled to claim monopoly over the same. He argued that individual parts of the mark, if not registered separately shall not enjoy the same level of protection as whole. He argued that both the plaintiff's society and defendant no. 1 have different aims and objects and are in different field of activity and the plaintiff has failed to show that the field of the activity of the two are same. He argued that the aims and objectives of the plaintiff and defendant are totally different as plaintiff preaches the idea of living Satguru, whereas defendant is the believer of the teachings of Baba Hardev Singh Ji and there is no likelihood of confusion or deception to the believers of the faith as prudent man of ordinary conscience can differentiate between the two marks. He also argued that perusal of cross-examination of PW-1 would show that plaintiff has not claimed the monopoly over the word "Nirankar". He also admitted that there are shops using the name of Nirankari as their trademark and admitted that the word "Nirankari" is the common word. PW-1 also admitted that plaintiff is not claiming any monopoly over their Satgurus, past or present. Counsel for the defendant has argued that cross-examination of Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:59:11 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.33 by 47 PW-2 and PW-3 would show that they are tutored and interested witnesses as they were followers of the plaintiff organization and were associated with it and therefore, their testimonies are self-contradictory. On the other hand, defendants had examined DW-2 Baba Jag Darshan Singh Nirankari, who clearly established the history of Nirankari movement and he being the religious head of Nirankari Darbar, produced the copy of Nirankari Darbar functioning since 18 th Century as Ex. DW- 2/1A. He also produced the copy of the book "Nirankari" published on 13.01.1931 exhibited as Ex. DW-2/1B which showcases the gathering of Nirankari Darbar and flyer Ex. DW-2/CE1 which clearly establishes the legacy of Nirankari Darbar since 18th century. Counsel for the defendant argued that testimony of DW-2 shows that plaintiff has failed to claim exclusivity over the word "Nirankari" as there are other prior and active user in the market. The plaintiff cannot claim goodwill for a trademark that is considered generic because it is not distinctive enough to be protected under Trademark Law. He also argued that the plaintiff has also failed to show that defendant has misrepresented his goods/services as that of the plaintiff. It was argued that the testimony of PW-2 and PW-
3, who were followers of the plaintiff organization, also could not prove misrepresentation or bad faith adoption.
35. In rebuttal, counsel for the plaintiff has argued that the judgments relied upon by the defendant are not applicable to the facts of the present case in as much as the plaintiff has been using the word "Nirankari" for last more than 70 years and has a large number of followers and devotees from semi urban/rural areas. The public at large associates the plaintiff with the dominant feature of its wordmark i.e. "Nirankari." The defendants have not challenged the plaintiff's wordmark before the Registrar. The judgment of Division Bench in South India Beverages ANIL Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date: 2025.09.19 SISODIA 14:59:21 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.34 by 47 (supra) has engrafted an exception to the 'anti-dissection rule' contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Trademarks Act, where the common part of the rival marks can be treated as a dominant part. The plaintiff has a family of marks, all of which use the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" which has indeed become a source identifier of the marks of the plaintiff. Not only this, the word "Nirankari" has acquired distinctiveness and the defendants have failed to provide any explanation for using the wordmark "Nirankari." It was also argued that in all the judgments relied upon by the defendants, orders were passed at an interim stage and the same cannot be applied to the facts of the present case as they were based on prima facie observations of the Hon'ble High Court.
36. Counsel for defendants nos. 1 and 2 in his rebuttal has reiterated the arguments already advanced by him and has further placed reliance on the judgments of Khadi & Village Industries Commission Vs. Registrar of Trademark 2025 SCC Online Bom 179; Subway IP LLC vs. Infinity Food & Ors. 2023:DHC:269; Yatra Online Ltd. vs. Mach Conferences & Events Ltd 2025: DHC:7167; Living Media India Ltd. & Anr vs. Alpha Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. 2016:DHC:747-DB and Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vasundhra Fashion Jewellery LLP and Anr.2023:DHC:4960 to argue that no exclusive right to use the common/generic name can be granted to a party and further that infringement of Trademark Act can only be a registered trademarks and the device mark has to be considered as a whole.
37. A careful perusal of the pleadings and evidence led by the parties would show that defendants have nowhere disputed the fact that plaintiff is the registered proprietor of 19 trademarks in Class 35, 41 and 45. It is Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:59:31 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.35 by 47 also not in dispute that the plaintiff society has been using the name Sant Nirankari Mandal since 1948. It is also undisputed that defendant no. 2, who is the Chairman of the defendant no. 1 Trust was associated with the plaintiff society till 2016 and thereafter he formed defendant no. 2 Trust in the year 2018. Thus, the plaintiff society is a prior user of the word "Nirankari/Nirankar." The Memorandum of Association of the plaintiff society Ex.PW-1/2 also shows that one of the aims and objects of the plaintiff society is to teach and preach the concept of one formless God (Nirankar). Plaintiff has proved on record the certificate of its registration Ex.PW-1/3 which was issued in 1948. Plaintiff has also placed on record various newspapers clippings, magazines and letters Ex.PW-1/4 to Ex.PW-1/11 showing its socio- religious and charitable activities for last number of years which are much prior to the inception of defendant no. 2 and which clearly establishes that the plaintiff society has been using the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" continuously and without any interruption or objection from any corner.
38. The defence raised by the defendants to the claim of the plaintiff is two folds i.e. i) The word "Nirankari/Nirankar" is a generic/common word and plaintiff cannot claim exclusive use of the same. ii) The word "Nirankari/Nirankar" has not been registered by the plaintiff as its trademark and therefore, the plaintiff cannot seek protection from infringement under the Trademarks Act. Counsel for the defendants has argued that as per Section 17 of the Trademarks Act, the plaintiff can claim exclusive right to the use of the trademark taken as a whole and it cannot claim exclusive right on a part of the whole of the trademark so registered. He also argued that plaintiff has failed to show that the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" has acquired a distinctive character so as to acquire a secondary meaning. ANIL Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:59:40 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.36 by 47
39. In the case of South India Beverages (supra) Hon'ble High Court observed that composite mark has led to the development of the doctrine of 'anti-dissection' and identification of the dominant mark. The court discussed the rule of 'anti-dissection' which mandates that the courts, whilst dealing with cases of trademark infringement involving composite marks, must consider the composite marks in their entirety as an indivisible whole rather than truncating or dissecting them into its component parts and make comparison with the corresponding parts of a rival mark to determine the likelihood of confusion. The raison d'être underscoring the said principle is that the commercial impression of a composite trademark on an ordinary prospective buyer is created by the mark as a whole and not by its component parts. While a mark is to be considered in entirety, yet it is permissible to accord more or less importance or 'dominance' to a particular portion or element of a mark in cases of composite marks. Thus, a particular element of a composite mark which enjoys greater prominence vis-à-vis other constituent elements, may be termed as a 'dominant mark'. It was observed that dominant features are significant because they attract attention and consumers are more likely to remember and rely on them for purposes of identification of the product. Usually, the dominant portion of a mark is that which has the greater strength or carries more weight.
40. In Bennet Coleman and Company Ltd. v. Fashion One Television (supra) Hon'ble High Court observed that the principle of 'anti dissection' does not impose an absolute embargo upon the consideration of the constituent elements of a composite mark. The said elements may be viewed as a preliminary step on the way to an ultimate determination of probable customer reaction to the conflicting Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:59:48 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.37 by 47 composites as a whole. Thus, the principle of 'anti-dissection' and identification of 'dominant mark' are not antithetical to one another and if viewed in a holistic perspective, the said principles complement each other..... It is also settled that while a trademark is supposed to be looked at in its entirety, yet the consideration of a trademark as a whole does not condone infringement where less than the entire trademark is appropriated.
41. In the present case, perusal of the various trademarks adopted by the plaintiff would show that the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" is the dominant feature of the family of the trademarks adopted by the plaintiff. All the trademarks adopted by the plaintiff uses either the word "Nirankari" or the word "Nirankar." It is also a matter of record that all these trademarks were registered by the plaintiff much prior to the formation of defendant no. 1 Trust by the defendants. It is also not in dispute that the plaintiff society has been using the name Sant Nirankari Mandal since 1948 i.e. for the last more than 70 years. Even though the trademarks of the plaintiff were not registered, there is a long history of use of the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" by the plaintiff which is sufficient to give the plaintiff right to protect its name under the common law of passing off.
42. In British School Society v. British International School, 2021 SCC Online Del 5210 where the plaintiff adopted the mark 'The British School' in the year 1963 and hence, there has been an exemplary long use of this name i.e. for about 58 years...the defendant adopted this mark in 2005 and never explained as to why he adopted this mark or that the defendant was not aware of the mark of the plaintiff, prior to its own registration. It was held that 'The British School' is an essential feature Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 14:59:57 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.38 by 47 of the mark of the plaintiff and its adoption by the defendant shall certainly infuse confusion in the minds of the students as also their parents as they shall believe the defendant has connection with the plaintiff and thus, the defendant shall ride upon the goodwill of the plaintiff... The mark of the defendant, when compared as a whole with the mark of the plaintiff, shall certainly create confusion especially when both are in identical fields viz educational.
In the present case as well, the defendants have adopted the name "Nirankari Dham" for its Trust. Defendant no.1 knowing fully well that the plaintiff was using the name 'Sant Nirankari Mandal' for last more than 70 years, have failed to give any explanation as to why they have used the word "Nirankari" in the name of their Trust. Defendant no. 2, who had been associated with the plaintiff society till 2016 was having knowledge of the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff society and still he chose to use a name which is similar to the name of the plaintiff society. Such an act on the part of defendant no. 2 can only be termed as a dishonest adoption with malafide intention to ride on the goodwill of the plaintiff society. The mark/name of the defendant Trust i.e. "Nirankari Dham" when compared as a whole with the trademark of the plaintiff "Sant Nirankari Mandal" shall certainly create confusion in the minds of the followers of the plaintiff society especially when both are in the identical fields i.e. socio religious charitable activities.
43. In Living Media India Ltd. vs. Aabtak Channel.com (John Does), 2023 SCC Online Del 5680 the court reiterated that the common part of the rival marks can be treated as a dominant part. On the basis of commonality, the court can arrive at a finding that the marks are deceptively similar to each other. This is an exception to the anti- dissection rule under Section 17(2) of the Trade Marks Act. In the ANIL Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date: 2025.09.19 SISODIA 15:00:17 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.39 by 47 present case as well, the common part of rival marks of the plaintiff and the defendants is "Nirankari" and adoption of the name/mark by the defendant is deceptively similar to the trademark of the plaintiff namely "Sant Nirankari Mandal."
44. In order to establish the fact that the trademark of the defendant i.e. "Nirankari Dham" is causing confusion and deception in the minds of general public, the plaintiff examined two witnesses namely PW-2 Purshottam Lal and PW-3 Vinod Kumar, who have filed their evidence by way of affidavits Ex.PW-2/A and PW-3/A. They have deposed that they have attended the programme organized by defendant no.1 Trust at Ghaziabad and Ghitorni respectively which was using the photograph of Nirankari Baba Hardev Singh Ji under the impression that the programme was being organized by the plaintiff. In their cross- examination, both these witnesses have deposed that they had attended the Satsang and saw the photograph of Baba Hardev Singh Ji being placed on the dais. PW-2 deposed that after Satsang was over, he met one Jai Prakash and was surprised to see the banner of Nirankari Dham on the stage and on his inquiry, Jai Prakash told him that it was started by defendant no. 2 and he informed about this fact in his Mandal. He also deposed that he had not attended the other Satsang in the name of Nirankari Dham. PW-3 in his cross-examination, deposed that when he had gone to Mehrauli to drop a passenger, he saw photograph of Baba Hardev Singh at one shop and on his inquiry, he was told that satsangs are organized here and one Satsang was going on but he was not told that it was being organized by Nirankari Dham and volunteered that he was told that it was Nirankari Satsang. He had attended the Satsang for about half an hour. He also deposed that he came to know about defendant no. 2 when he started receiving the messages and video of defendant no. 2 Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 15:00:30 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.40 by 47 on his phone after he shared his number in the Satsang. Counsel for defendant nos. 1 and 2 has argued that both these witnesses were members of plaintiff society and are tutored witnesses. These witnesses have deposed falsely at the instance of the plaintiff society. Perusal of cross-examination of defendant no. 2 Anurag Varshney, who appeared as DW-1 shows that he has admitted that one public service work was organized in the hospital in Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad. He also admitted that he was not given any authority by Baba Hardev Singh Ji or the plaintiff society to use his photographs for public functions.
45. The testimonies of PW-2 and PW-3 could not be demolished in their cross-examination and they have remained intact in so far as organizing of Satsang by defendant no.1 Trust is concerned. The unauthorized use of the word "Nirankari" and the photograph of Baba Hardev Singh by the defendants clearly amounts to infringement of the trademarks of the plaintiff.
46. Counsel for the defendant nos. 1 and 2 has also advanced arguments that the word "Nirankari" is being used by many traders in Delhi itself and he further argued that the word "Nirankari" is being used by "Nirankari Darbar" much prior to the use by the plaintiff. In support of his case, defendant examined DW-2 Baba Jag Darshan Singh, the spiritual head of "Nirankari Darbar". This witness in his affidavit by way of evidence has deposed that "Nirankari Darbar" was established in 1805 at Rawal Pindi and after partition the institution was re-established at Chandigarh by Baba Hara Singh. He also deposed that there was no connection of plaintiff society with the "Nirankari Darbar." He also deposed that plaintiff cannot claim exclusive statutory right over the word "Nirankari" apart from the mark as a whole. Cross-examination of Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 15:00:41 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.41 by 47 DW-2 will show that DW-2 was unable to disclose whether "Nirankari Darbar" was a society, trust or a registered body and deposed that it was found before the laws were enacted. He also deposed that Chandigarh is the only head quarter of "Nirankari Darbar."
47. Thus, from the perusal of testimony of DW-2 also, it is apparent that "Nirankari Darbar" based in Chandigarh does not have activities as wide as that of plaintiff nor its following and goodwill seems to match that of the plaintiff society which has a trans-border reputation and goodwill and is involved in large number of socio- religious activities which have been duly proved on record by the plaintiff in its evidence.
In order to be recognized as an exclusive user of a trademark or name, the user need not be its originator or inventor. The criterion is whether by long usage of a trademark or name, the plaintiff has acquired wide reputation and goodwill of its goods and services amongst the public, so that subsequent use of the same trademark or name by the defendant shall create confusion in the minds of a person of average intelligence that the goods or services belong to the plaintiff. It is also pertinent to mention here that Nirankari Darbar has never objected to the registration of the family of the trademarks of the plaintiff society wherein dominant feature is the word "Nirankari." The argument advanced by the counsel for the defendant that plaintiff did not sue other persons using the word "Nirankari" in their trade or business cannot be a ground for rejection of the claim of the plaintiff against the defendants. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the judgment of Sunil Mittal Vs. Darzi On Call 2017 SCC Online Del 7934, wherein it was held that, "it is not expected of a proprietor of a trademark to, instead of carrying on business under the trademark, make litigation of business by continuously being on the prowl for every use of that trademark, howsoever insignificant and Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 15:00:54 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.42 by 47 inconsequential it may be, and to take legal proceedings to prevent such use. A proprietor of a trademark is not expected to take legal proceedings, if it remains unaffected by the use of the same trademark by others."
48. It is also well settled that in order to obtain the relief of injunction, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to prove that it has suffered actual damages but it is sufficient if there is likelihood of damage to its reputation or goodwill or if the infringing trademark is likely to cause confusion or deception in the minds of general public.
49. In the present case, I am of the considered opinion that plaintiff has been able to establish that it is the prior user of the registered trademarks which is having the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" as its dominant mark and the defendant, who has dishonestly adopted the name/mark "Nirankari Dham" is likely to cause confusion/deception in the minds of general public and may cause loss of goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff society. Therefore, the issues are decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Issue no.4:
Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of damages to the sum of Rs.1 Crore along with interest, as prayed for? (OPP)
50. The onus of proving this issue has been cast on the plaintiff. The plaintiff has prayed for award of damages of Rs. 1 Crore against the defendants jointly and severally for unauthorized use or deceptively similar name and style i.e. "Nirankari Dham" as that of Sant Nirankari Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 15:01:02 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.43 by 47 Mandal (Regd.) and for their unauthorized activities along with interest @ 18% per annum from the due date till its realization.
51. It is pertinent to note here that plaintiff has not led any evidence on the issue of quantum of damages to be awarded to the plaintiff. PW-1 Dr. Praveen Khullar, Secretary (HQ) of plaintiff in the affidavit Ex.PW-
1/A has baldly reiterated its claim for award of damages. Defendants have also not placed on record their books of accounts to show the quantum of profits earned by them from their infringing activities. Hence, in the absence of any evidence available on record, it is nearly impossible to arrive at an amount of damages to be awarded to the plaintiff.
52. Hon'ble High Court in Larsen and Toubro Limited Vs. Chagan Bhai Patel reported at MIPR 2009(1)194 observed that it would be encouraging the violators of intellectual property, if the defendants not withstanding having contested the suit are not burdened with punitive damages.
53. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Microsoft Corporation v. Rajendra Pawar & Anr. reported as 2008 (36) PTC 697 (Del.), considering the aspect of punitive damages, it was held as below: -
"22. Perhaps it has now become a trend of sorts, especially in matters pertaining to passing off, for the defending party to evade Court proceedings in a systematic attempt to jettison the relief sought by the Plaintiff. Such flagrancy of the Defendant's conduct is strictly deprecatory, and those who recklessly ANIL Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR KUMAR SISODIA Date: 2025.09.19 SISODIA 15:01:10 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.44 by 47 indulge in such shenanigans must do so at their peril, for it is now an inherited wisdom that evasion of Court proceedings does not de facto tantamount to escape from liability. Judicial Process has its own way of bringing to task such erring parties whilst at the same time ensuring that the aggrieved party who has knocked the doors of the Court in anticipation of justice is afforded with adequate relief, both in law and in equity. It is here that the concept of awarding punitive damages comes into perspective.
23. Punitive damages are a manifestation of equitable relief granted to an aggrieved party, which, owing to its inability to prove actual damages, etc., could compensated not by be adequately the Court. Theoretically as well as practically, the practice of awarding of punitive damages may be rationalized as preventing under compensation of the aggrieved party, allowing redress for undetectable torts and taking some strain away from the criminal justice system.
Where the conduct of the erring party is found to be egregiously invidious and calculated to mint profits for his own self, awarding punitive damages prevents the erring party from taking advantage of its own wrong by escaping prosecution or detection."
54. Keeping in view the fact that defendant no. 1 Trust was registered in the year 2018 itself and the plaintiff also filed the present suit in August 2018 for restraining the defendants for injunction and damages and Ld. Predecessor of this court vide order dated 11.12.2018 allowed the interim injunction application filed by the plaintiff and restrained the defendants from using the word/name "Nirankari" or any other Digitally signed by ANIL ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 15:01:17 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.45 by 47 deceptively similar word, mark or logo, it cannot be assumed that the plaintiff society had suffered substantial financial losses due to the illegal activities of the defendants but there is no doubt that such illegal activities might have caused loss of goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff society in the eyes of general public, who might have been confused/deceived due to illegal use of the word/name "Nirankari" by the defendants in the name of their trust. Hence, taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to award damages of Rs.5 lacs to the plaintiff. The defendants no.1,4,5 and 7 shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the damages to the plaintiff. The issue is accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Relief:
55. In view of my findings on the issues here in above, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants nos. 1, 4, 5 and 7. A decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants and defendants, their successors, assignees, representatives etc. are perpetually restrained from carrying out any illegal activities in the name and style of "Nirankari Dham" or any other name having the word "Nirankari/Nirankar" as their dominant mark or any other such name or logo identical or deceptively similar to the name of the plaintiff society. The defendants, their successors, assignees, representatives etc. are further restrained from using the domain names of www.nirankaridham.com or any other domain name similar to the domain name of the plaintiff or having any other domain name with dominant mark "Nirankari/Nirankar".
A decree of mandatory injunction is passed in favour of the Digitally signed ANIL by ANIL KUMAR SISODIA KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19 15:01:25 +0530 CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.46 by 47 plaintiffs and against the defendants, their successors, assignees, representatives etc. directing them to delete and destroy all the material having the name of defendant no.1 either in physical or in electronic form including the infringing material available on the social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube etc. under the name and style of "Nirankari Dham" and to delete the domain name www.nirankaridham.com.
A decree of damages for the sum of Rs. 5 lacs is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants no.1,4,5 and 7. Defendant no.1,4,5 and 7 shall pay the damages within one month from the date of passing of the decree, failing which they shall be liable to pay the damages along with simple interest @ 9% per annum.
The plaintiff shall also be entitled to cost of the suit. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally
signed by ANIL
ANIL KUMAR
SISODIA
KUMAR Date:
SISODIA 2025.09.19
15:01:32
+0530
Announced in the open Court (ANIL KUMAR SISODIA)
Dated: 19th September, 2025 District Judge (Commercial Court-04)
Central District, Tis Hazari Courts,Delhi CS DJ 5992/18 Sant Nirankari Mandal (Regd.) Vs. Nirankari Dham & Ors Page No.47 by 47