Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Kuvam Gujral vs Ashim Gujral & Ors on 4 May, 2022

Author: Mukta Gupta

Bench: Mukta Gupta, Neena Bansal Krishna

                          $~ 7
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +    FAO(OS) (COMM) 86/2022
                                KUVAM GUJRAL                                    ..... Appellant
                                        Represented by:          Mr. Arvind K. Nigam, Sr.
                                                                 Advocate with Mr. Mudit
                                                                 Sharma & Ms. Snigdha
                                                                 Sharma, Advocates.

                                                   versus

                                ASHIM GUJRAL & ORS                             ..... Respondents
                                         Represented by:         Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr.
                                                                 Advocate with Ms. Nancy Roy
                                                                 &    Ms.     Ananya       Chug,
                                                                 Advocates for R-4.

                              CORAM:
                              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
                              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
                                                ORDER

% 04.05.2022 CAV 100/2022

1. Learned counsel for the respondent enters appearance.

2. Caveat is discharged.

CM APPL. 19068/2022 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application is disposed of.

FAO(OS) (COMM) 86/2022, CM APPL. 19067/2022 (Stay) & CM APPL. 19069/2022 (Additional documents)

1. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28th February, 2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A. Nos. 16755/2021 allowing the application of the respondent under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed FAO(OS) (COMM) 86/2022 Page 1 of 3 By:NIRMLA TIWARI Signing Date:06.05.2022 11:20:09 and restraining the appellant from using the trademark 'Moti Mahal', the appellant prefers the present appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the trademark 'Moti Mahal' was used by Mr. Kundan Lal Gujral, who was survived by his wife and daughter as his son Mr. Nand Lal Gujral pre-deceased him on 08th March, 1990. Before Mr. Kundan Lal Gujral died on 18th December, 1997, he had applied for the registration of trademark 'Moti Mahal', though no registration was granted by them. In view of the death of Mr. Kundan Lal Gujral on 18th December, 1997,the proprietary rights in the trademark 'Moti Mahal' devolved on his wife Ms. Prakash Devi as also his adopted daughter Ms. Shashi Kakkar and the widow of his son, namely, Ms. Rupa Gujral and the two grandsons, namely, Mr. Ashim Gujral and Mr. Munish Gujral. The appellant is the son of Mr. Ashim Gujral and Mr. Munish Gujral.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant claims that since Mr. Ashim Gujral and Mr. Munish Gujral inherited the proprietary rights in the trademark 'Moti Mahal' by intestate succession on the death of Mr. Kundan Lal Gujral as grandsons, they inherited the trademark for the branch and not in their individual rights, thus the said trademark is required to be used by both the branches i.e., of Mr. Ashim Gujral and Mr. Munish Gujral and the appellant, who is the son of Mr. Ashim Gujral, cannot be excluded from using the said trademark.

4. Notice. Learned counsel for the respondent accepts notice.

5. List this appeal for hearing on 08th July, 2022.

6. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

MAY 04, 2022 S.Sharma Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed FAO(OS) (COMM) 86/2022 Page 3 of 3 By:NIRMLA TIWARI Signing Date:06.05.2022 11:20:09