You spend years building a brand. You register the mark, you win an injunction against a copycat, and you assume the matter is closed. Then the copycat quietly returns with the same look and a slightly changed name, and waves its own registration certificate as if it were a licence to carry on. Are you still protected, or back to square one?
The Bombay High Court answered that question in July 2026. In Dr. Ashok M. Bhat v. Harichand Nagpal & Ors., the Court held that a trademark registration is no defence to breaching a subsisting injunction. It backed the point with costs of over ₹82 lakh. The other side had been restrained in 2010 from using the NOVA mark for hair cream. He carried on anyway under NOVA MINI and NONI, and argued that his own registrations protected him. The Court disagreed.
In practice, this ruling is both a warning and an opportunity for founders, MSME owners, and brand managers across India. It confirms that an injunction has teeth, that your product label carries copyright over and above your trademark, and that a wrongdoer cannot register a way around a court order. This post explains what the Court decided, why registration failed as a shield, and the exact steps to protect and enforce your brand.
What the Bombay High Court decided in the NOVA case
Dr. Ashok M. Bhat, proprietor of NNOVA & Company, has sold cosmetics under the NOVA name for decades. He holds a registered NOVA trademark, and he also owns copyright in the artistic work on the NOVA carton and label. Harichand Nagpal, proprietor of Ravi Industries, sold competing hair cream. The two sides have litigated over the NOVA family of marks since 2007.
Back in 2010, the Court restrained Nagpal from using the NOVA mark. Despite that order, he stayed in the market under two labels. One was NOVA MINI, which simply bolted “MINI” onto the very word he could not use. The other was NONI, which carried a similar green-and-black get-up. Bhat returned to court and asked that the breach be punished.
Justice Arif S. Doctor found the violation wilful. As a result, the Court directed Nagpal to pay ₹32.42 lakh to Bhat and a further ₹50 lakh to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority, which is over ₹82 lakh in all. It carries the number Interim Application (L) No. 9324 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 378 of 2021, Bombay High Court.
A registration certificate is not a hall pass. Once a court restrains you from using a mark, you obey the order. You do not register a near-copy and carry on.
Key Takeaway: An injunction binds the party named in it, and a later registration does not quietly dissolve that order.
Why a trademark registration is no defence to an injunction
Registration matters, but it does less than infringers hope. Section 28 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 gives a registered proprietor the exclusive right to use the mark. That right is not absolute. Section 28(3), read with Section 30(2)(e), says that where two people both hold registrations for identical or similar marks, neither can sue the other for infringement on the strength of registration alone.
Registration matters, but it does less than infringers hope. Section 28 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 gives a registered proprietor the exclusive right to use the mark. That right is not absolute. Section 28(3), read with Section 30(2)(e), says that where two people both hold registrations for identical or similar marks, neither can sue the other for infringement on the strength of registration alone.
If the party breaches instead, the brand owner can move under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which lets the court attach property or order detention for disobedience of an injunction. That is the machinery Bhat used, and the ₹82 lakh order shows how costly disobedience can become.
Can I keep using a mark if I hold my own registration?
Not if a court has restrained you from using it. A registration does not override an injunction. You must approach the court to modify the order first. Acting on your own invites a finding of wilful breach and heavy costs.
Key Takeaway: Registration decides who can sue whom for infringement. It does not decide whether you may disobey an injunction, and the answer to that is no.
Your label is protected twice: trademark and copyright
Here is the layer many businesses miss. A brand on a package is usually two rights at once. The name is a trademark. Its artwork, meaning the logo, the colour scheme, and the layout of the carton, is an “artistic work” protected by copyright under Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957 from the moment it is created.
Here is the layer many businesses miss. A brand on a package is usually two rights at once. The name is a trademark. Its artwork, meaning the logo, the colour scheme, and the layout of the carton, is an “artistic work” protected by copyright under Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957 from the moment it is created.
Register the word, but also secure the artwork. Two rights are far harder to design around than one.
Key Takeaway: A registered name and a copyrighted label are separate shields. Own both, and a copycat cannot slip between them.
Registration is no defence to passing off either
Even without any registration, a brand owner keeps common-law rights. Section 27(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 expressly preserves the action for passing off. The Supreme Court confirmed the strength of this right in S. Syed Mohideen v. P. Sulochana Bai, (2016) 2 SCC 683, holding that passing-off protection can outrank a registration.
Even without any registration, a brand owner keeps common-law rights. Section 27(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 expressly preserves the action for passing off. The Supreme Court confirmed the strength of this right in S. Syed Mohideen v. P. Sulochana Bai, (2016) 2 SCC 683, holding that passing-off protection can outrank a registration.
Key Takeaway: Whether the fight runs under trademark, copyright, or passing off, a defendant’s registration is not the last word. Your prior rights are.
What the NOVA ruling means for your brand
Read this ruling as a checklist for your own business. If a competitor has tweaked your name or lifted your packaging, three questions decide your position. Do you hold a registered mark? Have you secured copyright in the label? Is there an injunction or clear prior use on your side? Each answer adds a layer the other side must overcome.
Read this ruling as a checklist for your own business. If a competitor has tweaked your name or lifted your packaging, three questions decide your position. Do you hold a registered mark? Have you secured copyright in the label? Is there an injunction or clear prior use on your side? Each answer adds a layer the other side must overcome.
The ₹50 lakh paid to the Legal Services Authority is the real signal. Courts are willing to make disobedience hurt, not merely to compensate.
Key Takeaway: Layered rights, plus a genuine willingness to enforce, turn a court order from a piece of paper into a real deterrent.
A practical roadmap for brand owners
These steps put you in the position Bhat was in, with the rights and the record to enforce them.
- 1. Register your word mark in the correct class under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and register the variants you actually use.
- 2. Register copyright in your label, carton, and logo artwork with the Copyright Office as an artistic work.
- 3. Keep dated proof of first use, such as invoices, packaging, and advertisements, to support prior-use and passing-off rights.
- 4. Set up a trademark watch so you learn early when a similar mark is advertised or filed.
- 5. Send a clear cease-and-desist notice the moment you spot copying, and record the dates and evidence.
- 6. Where the copying is blatant, apply promptly for an interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC.
- 7. After you hold an injunction, keep buying and storing the infringing product with bills as market evidence.
- 8. If the other side breaches, move under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC for disobedience, and press for costs.
- 9. Consider a rectification against a wrongly granted registration, but do not let it delay enforcement of your injunction.
- 10. Claim actual costs and compensation. The NOVA order shows that courts will grant substantial figures for wilful breach.
- 11. Keep the paper trail clean, because Rule 2A and contempt applications turn on documented, dated conduct.
- 12. Review your portfolio each year so your registrations track the products and packaging you sell today.
Key Takeaway: Protection is built before the dispute, and enforcement succeeds on the evidence you gathered early.
Frequently asked questions
Does a trademark registration protect me from a copyright claim on my label?
No. The name and the artwork are different rights. A registration for the name gives no right to copy another party's label, which is protected under Section 51 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Is registering only my logo enough?
How fast should I act when someone copies my brand?
Protect the brand you have built
The NOVA MINI ruling sends one message to Indian businesses. Your rights are only as strong as your willingness to enforce them, and a wrongdoer cannot register a way around a court order. A registered mark, a copyrighted label, and a clear record of use together give you a position that is difficult to break and expensive to defy.
If a competitor is trading on your name or your packaging, or if an order in your favour is being ignored, the time to act is now. A focused review of your trademark and copyright portfolio, followed by firm enforcement where needed, protects both your market and your reputation. [INTERNAL LINK: trademark registration services] [INTERNAL LINK: brand enforcement and litigation]
To discuss protecting or enforcing your brand in India, you may contact Unimarks Legal Solutions for guidance tailored to your facts.
Case reference: Dr. Ashok M. Bhat v. Harichand Nagpal & Ors., Interim Application (L) No. 9324 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 378 of 2021, Bombay High Court, as reported by LiveLawBiz (July 2026). Statutory references: the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Copyright Act, 1957.
About the Author
Advocate Suresh Kumar has a law practice specialising in Intellectual Property Rights, Commercial legal advisory, debt recovery, commercial litigation, and dispute resolution for domestic and international clients. He is enrolled with the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and represents clients before all courts and forums in Chennai, Tamil Nadu. This article reflects his understanding of the current legal position and is intended solely for informational purposes.
Disclaimer
This article is published by Unimarks Legal for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship. The contents are based on Indian law as applicable at the time of writing and are subject to change. Readers should not act upon the information in this article without seeking independent legal counsel. Every legal situation is unique, and the application of law depends on specific facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. This publication is made in compliance with the Bar Council of India Rules, which prohibit advertising or solicitation by advocates. Any information received through this article should not be construed as legal advice.
For specific legal guidance on your matter, you may consult a qualified advocate in your jurisdiction.
