In a landmark decision in the intra-family trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court overturned a May 28 District Court order of interim injunction that prohibited brothers Shuvabrata and Shouryabrata Mandal from practicing law under the “FoxMandal” trademark. The action was filed by their brother Som Mandal, who owns and runs Fox Mandal & Co., a different legal organization, challenging the defendants’ names, which are Fox Mandal and Associates.
Context of the Conflict
• The dispute began when Som Mandal filed a lawsuit in the District Court, claiming that his brothers were using the mark “FoxMandal,” which he claimed to be his sole property, illegally. On May 15, 2025, District Judge Vidya Prakash of the Patiala House Courts issued an interim order prohibiting Shuvabrata and Shouryabrata Mandal from using the term “FoxMandal” for legal services or even as domain name for their website.
• Som Mandal said that he had acquired a respectable legal business and a tremendous deal of goodwill by taking over Fox Mandal & Co. in 1989. He claimed that the term “Fox Mandal” was a significant component of his company’s trademark and that his brothers’ use of a confusingly similar logo and brand was stealing customers, therefore violating his rights.
Intervention of the High Court
Through Shuvabrata Mandal, Fox Mandal and Associates appealed the district court’s decision to the high court. The matter was considered by a division bench made up of Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul, who noted the parties’ consent. Without considering the case’s merits, the Court dismissed the temporary injunction in a balanced order.
The court stated:
• Having heard, with consent, the appeals are disposed of in the following terms: The impugned order is quashed and set aside without expressing any opinion on the merits of the contentions from either side or the sustainability of the impugned order.
• The appellants were additionally instructed by the High Court to respond to Som Mandal’s application by June 2 in accordance with Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC. The deadline for the respondent to submit a rebuttal is June 5. On June 6, the Commercial Court must consider the application for final arguments and provide a decision independent of any earlier observations.
Legal Assistance
• Senior advocate A.S. Chandiok appeared on behalf of Som Mandal, while seasoned trademark attorneys Sandeep Sethi and Jayant Mehta represented the appellants. Prominent legal experts’ participation emphasizes the case’s significance and intricacy.
• This case also demonstrates how online trademark registration procedures or activities may result in complex disputes when family firms separate or develop on their own. According to legal experts, many issues might have been avoided with appropriate registration and well-defined usage agreements.
Important Legal Concerns
• Whether Shuvabrata and Shouryabrata Mandal’s registration and use of the “FoxMandal” mark amounts to trademark infringement or is a legitimate use of a family brand is one of the case’s main legal issues.
• Following the hearing on Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC, which address temporary injunctions in civil actions, the case is currently disposed of. The court will choose whether to reinstate or ultimately reject the injunction during the subsequent hearing.
What This Means for the Law Community
• In terms of brand identity, this case ought to serve as a warning to law firms, particularly those that are named after founding members or families. It is strongly advised to secure trademarks with a proactive approach and to obtain legal clarification on the matter, given the growing usage of digital platforms and the online trademark registration process.
• Additionally, it highlights the need of trademark attorneys in resolving some of the most complex family-business conflicts. Legal experts will be closely watching the Commercial Court’s decision on June 6th, as it could establish a precedent for similar actions in the professional services industry.
Despite giving Fox Mandal and Associates a little reprieve, the Delhi High Court’s interim remedy is still liable to being overturned by the Commercial Court following arguments under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC. In this extremely contentious case involving family enterprises and joint legacies, the quashing of the original restriction emphasizes the duty to due process and unbiased adjudication.
This case is one that Indian lawyers should keep an eye on since prominent advocates like Sandeep Sethi and Jayant Mehta made appearances and because the reputations of legal professionals were called into question. Whether the decision is settled or not, it will probably affect the upcoming round of name, brand, and legacy conflicts in this sector.
A comprehensive source of information on various laws and attorneys with the highest qualifications in the industry, Sharks of Law is a one-stop legal resource. This law practice can help you find a lawyer who meets your legal needs. The attorneys at Sharks of Law have the expertise to offer legal counsel in any subject pertaining to different legislation.
Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com
Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993
https://www.sharksoflaw.com/blog-detail/delhi-hc-lifts-ban-on-fox-mandals-use-of-foxmandal-trademark