Bombay HC Rejects Newspaper’s Last-Minute Bid To Stall ‘Pune Mirror’ Trademark Suit: Invalidity Was Never Pleaded

The plaintiffs sued for trade mark infringement and passing off, alleging that the defendants’ use of “Pune Mirror” and “KM Kothrud Mirror” infringed the plaintiffs’ registered “Pune Mirror” and “Sunday Pune Mirror” marks.

The defendants relied, among other things, on their newspaper title registration under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.

Although the suit was filed in 2015, issues were framed and recast, evidence was completed by 26 August 2025, and final arguments were underway when the defendants sought a stay under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

They relied on rectification applications filed before the Trade Marks Registry in 2023 and 2024, alleging non-use, and alternatively sought an invalidity issue and time to apply to the competent forum.

Whether the defendants had raised a sufficiently pleaded and prima facie tenable challenge to the validity of the plaintiffs’ registered marks to warrant framing an issue under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act

Whether the pending rectification applications before the Trade Marks Registry, or the defendants’ alternative request to frame an issue and seek rectification, justified staying the suit at the final-arguments stage

Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999

A Section 124 stay requires a prima facie tenable invalidity plea arising from the pleadings.

Although the suit was filed in 2015, issues were framed and recast, evidence was completed by 26 August 2025, and final arguments were underway

A Section 124 stay requires a prima facie tenable invalidity plea arising from the pleadings.

They alternatively sought an invalidity issue and time to apply to the competent forum.