Delhi High Court
Intellectual Property LawArbitration and Mediation

Settlement-based territorial trademark restrictions require geo-blocking of digital platforms to prevent unauthorized access.

Sanjay Mehra vs Sharad Mehra & Ors.

Delhi High CourtJUDGMENT: March 30, 20263 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Settlement-based territorial trademark restrictions require geo-blocking of digital platforms to prevent unauthorized access.. Sanjay Mehra vs Sharad Mehra & Ors.. Delhi High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

Sanjay Mehra (SM) and Sharad Mehra (SDM) were directors of Superon Schweisstechnik India Ltd.

Source reference: para. 3

Following a family settlement, the business was divided: SM received exclusive rights to use the trademark "SUPERON" within India, while SDM received exclusive rights for its use outside India.

Source reference: para. 4

On 27.04.2023, the parties executed Terms of Settlement (TOS) before a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court to resolve pending disputes.

Source reference: paras. 7-8

Clause 4 of the TOS prohibited SDM from using "SUPERON" in India in any manner, subject to a narrow exception for export-related documentation under Clause 7.

Source reference: para. 8

Clause 6 prohibited both parties from "interlinking" their respective brand divisions or companies directly or indirectly, including on social media.

Source reference: para. 8

Both parties subsequently filed cross-contempt petitions alleging wilful disobedience of the TOS.

Source reference: para. 12

SM alleged SDM was using "SUPERON" on LinkedIn and physical hoardings in India without geo-blocking his website.

Source reference: paras. 13, 27

SDM alleged SM was "interlinking" the marks "SUPERON" and "STANVAC" on physical hoardings and social media.

Source reference: paras. 44, 48
02

Issues

1. Whether the use of a trademark on social media platforms and websites accessible within a restricted territory constitutes "use" of the mark in that territory under the TOS.

Source reference: para. 51

2. Whether the prohibition against "interlinking" group companies and brands in the TOS is restricted to electronic media or extends to physical advertisements and hoardings.

Source reference: para. 80

3. Whether the court in its contempt jurisdiction can mandate geo-blocking of websites to ensure compliance with territorial trademark restrictions.

Source reference: para. 57

4. Whether the use of the term "SCHWEISSTECHNIK" by SDM constitutes contempt in the absence of a specific prohibitory clause in the TOS beyond the company name.

Source reference: para. 78
03

Law Applied

The court applied the principle that wilful disobedience of an undertaking or settlement terms recorded by a court amounts to civil contempt.

Source reference: para. 91

Regarding trademark "use," the court relied on Tata Sons Private Limited v. Hakunamatata Tata Founders, holding that the mere presence of a website in a geography and the ability of customers to access it constitutes "targeting" and "use".

Source reference: para. 51

It further cited N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corporation to establish that advertisement in media amounts to the use of a trademark regardless of the physical availability of the product.

Source reference: para. 52

On contempt jurisdiction, the court applied Balwantbhai Somabhai Bhandari v. Hiralal Somabhai, affirming that courts can issue directions to nullify advantages secured through contumacious conduct.

Source reference: para. 89

Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M. Shetty, which allows courts to direct a contemnor to "purge the contempt".

Source reference: para. 91
04

Reasoning

The court reasoned that because Clause 4 of the TOS creates an absolute embargo on SDM using "SUPERON" in India (save for narrow export exceptions), any digital presence accessible in India—such as LinkedIn posts or non-geo-blocked websites—violates the TOS.

Source reference: paras. 54-55

The court rejected SDM’s defense that disclaimers on websites were sufficient, noting they did not override the express territorial restriction.

Source reference: para. 56

It held that geo-blocking is a "logical and inevitable corollary" of the TOS to prevent digital spillover into SM’s exclusive territory.

Source reference: para. 57

Regarding SM’s conduct, the court dismissed the argument that "interlinking" prohibitions applied only to electronic media; the use of the word "OR" and the phrase "directly or indirectly" in Clause 6 indicated the restriction encompassed physical hoardings where SM displayed "SUPERON" and "STANVAC" together.

Source reference: paras. 80-82

the court found no contempt regarding the term "SCHWEISSTECHNIK," as the TOS only prohibited its use in SDM’s company name, not its general use.

Source reference: para. 78
05

Holding

The court held both parties to be in wilful disobedience of the TOS.

Rather than immediate punishment, the court issued mandatory directions to purge the contempt.

Source reference: para. 93

SDM was ordered to: (i) refrain from using "SUPERON" on social media/websites unless geo-blocked for India; (ii) remove physical hoardings of "SUPERON" in India; (iii) demarcate operations into three separate divisions; and (iv) cease marketing industrial products under the "Stanvac Prime" brand.

Source reference: para. 93

SM was ordered to: (i) cease interlinking "SUPERON" with "STANVAC/STARBLAZE" in physical and digital domains; (ii) remove hoardings interlinking the marks; and (iii) geo-block websites containing "SUPERON" so they are inaccessible outside India.

Source reference: para. 94

Both parties were directed to file compliance affidavits within four weeks.

Source reference: paras. 93(vi), 94(iv)
06

Acts & Sections Cited

4 provisions across 3 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Companies Act, 20132

Trade Marks Act, 19991

Transfer of Property Act, 18821

Delhi High Court

Original Court PDF

Sanjay MehravsSharad Mehra & Ors.

Delhi High Court · March 30, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment