Kiran Raj

The Bombay High Court has appointed former Supreme Court judge, Justice R.V. Raveendran, to mediate the trademark dispute between real estate developers Abhishek Lodha and Abhinandan Lodha. The court directed that the mediation will initially involve only the two brothers, with other parties to be included at a later stage if necessary. The mediation process will proceed without prejudice to the pending ₹5,000 crore trademark infringement suit, which has been scheduled for further hearing on March 21, 2025, in case mediation fails.

The dispute stems from a long-standing trademark conflict between Macrotech Developers, owned by Abhishek Lodha, and House of Abhinandan Lodha, founded by Abhinandan Lodha. The litigation arose after Macrotech Developers filed a suit seeking to restrain Abhinandan Lodha’s company from using the ‘Lodha’ name in its real estate projects, alleging a violation of a 2017 family settlement agreement. The suit also demands ₹5,000 crore in damages, citing consumer confusion and trademark infringement.

According to Macrotech Developers, the Lodha brothers had parted ways in 2015, with Abhishek Lodha continuing to lead Macrotech’s real estate business while Abhinandan Lodha pursued a separate non-real estate venture. The 2017 family settlement granted Macrotech exclusive rights over real estate operations under the ‘Lodha’ name, along with a non-compete clause barring Abhinandan Lodha from engaging in real estate activities in designated regions, including the Mumbai Metropolitan Region and Greater London.

Macrotech Developers alleges that Abhinandan Lodha’s company has violated this agreement by continuing to use the ‘Lodha’ trademark in its branding and marketing materials. The plaintiff contends that this has led to consumer confusion, as the ‘Lodha’ brand is widely recognized in the real estate sector.

In response, Abhinandan Lodha’s legal representatives have denied any trademark infringement, asserting that ‘House of Abhinandan Lodha’ is an independent brand, distinct from ‘Lodha.’ They argue that the brand has been used prominently in all their projects and has been registered as a trademark since 2020. They further contend that any alleged misuse by third parties cannot be attributed to them.

A single-judge bench of Justice Arif Doctor recorded that both parties had agreed to mediation as a possible means of resolving the dispute. The court noted that, given the complexity of the matter and the involvement of multiple entities, it would be prudent to first limit the mediation process to the two Lodha brothers before expanding it to other parties.

The order stated: "Initially, the mediation shall be between the two brothers... It shall be open to the mediator, after holding a meeting with them, to issue appropriate directions for the inclusion of all parties to the suit. We shall also not preclude any parties from approaching the mediator for participation."

The court clarified that the mediation would proceed without prejudice to the rights of either party in the pending trademark suit. The court further observed that if mediation does not result in a settlement, the question of interim relief will be reconsidered in the next hearing.

Justice Doctor also acknowledged the concerns raised by Macrotech Developers, whose counsel, Senior Advocate Darius Khambata, had suggested that all relevant parties to the suit should be involved in mediation from the outset to prevent future disputes. However, the court decided that the mediation should commence with only the two brothers to avoid prolonging the litigation.

Based on these considerations, the Bombay High Court issued the following directives:

• Justice R.V. Raveendran, former judge of the Supreme Court, is appointed as the mediator to facilitate discussions between Abhishek Lodha and Abhinandan Lodha.

• The mediation will initially be limited to the two brothers. If necessary, the mediator may later include additional parties.

• The mediation is ordered without prejudice to the pending trademark suit, which will be reviewed after the mediation period.

• If mediation fails, the case will proceed for interim relief, and the next hearing is scheduled for March 21, 2025.

Case Title: N/A
Case Number: N/A
Bench: Justice Arif Doctor