Allowed¶29

Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd. v. Rakesh U Oswal and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Nov 2025COMMP/13/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court COMMP No. 13 of 2025; trade mark entry expunged/cancelled/removed by consent; Trade Marks Act, 1999; Trade Mark No. 1348966; class 25 readymade garments; consent undertaking recorded by Delhi High Court order dated 10th October 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No.539 of 2022; petitioner SSML (Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd.); Respondent No.1 Rakesh U. Oswal; petition allowed in terms of prayer clause (a); disposed of 19.11.2025 by Arif S. Doctor, J.

What did the court decide?

Prayer clause (a) granted: the entry relating to the mark registered under Trade Mark No. 1348966 in respect of readymade garments included in class 25 in the name of Respondent No.1 is wholly expunged, cancelled and/or removed from the Register of Trade Marks; the Commercial Miscellaneous Petition is accordingly disposed of. ¶29

Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd. vs Rakesh U Oswal and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the entry relating to the mark registered under Trade Mark No. 1348966 in respect of readymade garments included in class 25 in the name of Respondent No.1 should be wholly expunged, cancelled and/or removed from the Register of Trade Marks (prayer clause (a) of the Petition).

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The Commercial Miscellaneous Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), noting the consent of Respondent No.1; consequently the entry relating to the mark registered under Trade Mark No. 1348966 in respect of readymade garments included in class 25 in the name of Respondent No.1 is wholly expunged, cancelled and/or removed from the Register of Trade Marks.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (Coram: Arif S. Doctor, J.; decided 19th November 2025) — Commercial Miscellaneous Petition No. 13 of 2025 filed by Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd. ('SSML', as printed in the caption) against Rakesh U Oswal And Anr. ALLOWED in terms of prayer clause (a), noting the consent of Respondent No.1, and disposed of. The consent rested on Respondent No.1's (Rakesh U. Oswal/RUO) undertaking recorded in the Petitioner's suit, Commercial IP Suit No.539 of 2022, by the Delhi High Court's order dated 10th October 2025, agreeing to cooperate in allowing the present petition and making it absolute in terms of prayer clause 30(a). Effect of the order: the entry relating to the impugned label registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 under Trade Mark No. 1348966 in class 25 (readymade garments) in the name of Respondent No.1 is wholly expunged, cancelled and/or removed from the Register of Trade Marks. Counsel: Minesh Andharia a/w Jay Shah i/b Krishna & Saurastri Associates LLP for the Petitioner; Santosh Tiwari a/w Darshit Jain for Respondent No.1.

¶1

24-COMMP-13-2025 (OS).DOC

¶2

1/2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

COMMERCIAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 13 OF 2025

¶5

Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd.

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Rakesh U Oswal And Anr.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

Mr. Minesh Andharia a/w Mr. Jay Shah i/b Krishna & Saurastri Associates LLP, for the Petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Santosh Tiwari a/w Mr. Darshit Jain, for Respondent No.1.

¶12

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 19th NOVEMBER 2025

¶13

P.C.

¶14

Mr. Andharia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has tendered a copy of the order dated 10th October 2025, passed by the Delhi High Court in Commercial IP Suit No.539 of 2022. Mr. Andharia points out that the said Commercial IP Suit was filed by the Petitioner herein before the Delhi High Court. He further points out that in the said Suit Respondent No.1 to captioned Miscellaneous Petition has undertaken as follows:

¶15

"11. Rakesh U. Oswal/RUO agrees, undertakes and consents to cooperate with SSML in allowing the Comm. Miscellaneous Petition No. 13 of 2025 in respect

¶16

of the impugned label registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 under 1348966 in class 25 pending before the Bombay High Court and making the same absolute in terms of prayer clause 30 (a) thereof which reads as follows:

¶17

“This Petition be allowed and the entry relating to the mark registered under Trade Mark No. 1348966 in respect of readymade garments

¶18

Vaibhav

¶19

24-COMMP-13-2025 (OS).DOC

¶20

2/2

¶21

included in class 25 in the name of Respondent No.1 be wholly expunged, cancelled and/or removed from the Register of Trade Marks by an order of this Hon’ble Court.”

¶22

Mr. Andharia submits that basis this undertaking the present Commercial

¶23

Miscellaneous Petition would have to be allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus:

¶24

"(a) The Petition be allowed and the entry relating to the mark

¶25

registered under Trade Mark No.1348966 in respect of readymade garment included in class 25 in the name of Respondent No.1 be wholly expunged, cancelled and/or removed from the Register of Trade Marks by an order of this Hon’ble Court;"

¶26

Mr. Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1

¶27

confirms this position.

¶28

Hence, the Commercial Miscellaneous Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), noting the consent of Respondent No.1.

¶29

The Commercial Miscellaneous Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

[ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.]

¶31

Vaibhav

Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd. v. Rakesh U Oswal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siyaram Sill Mills Ltd. v. Rakesh U Oswal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Franco-Indian Pharmaceuticals Private Limited vs Benatton Pharmaceutical Private Limited

Fraunhofer Gesellschaft Zur Forderung Der Angewandten Forschung E v vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

Csb Bank Limited vs Vikram B Trivedi

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. Vs Mrs. Alka Singh, Proprietor of the Firm Alkvish Pharma Exports

Medipack Global Ventures Private Limited vs Assitant Controller of Patents and Designs

Nanji Popatlal Shah vs Ratna Rupal Chs Ltd.