Arctic
Invent
Case Registry
Dashboard
Case Explorer
Back to Explorer
Update Case Entry
Manually curate individual case documents inside the PostgreSQL engine.
Case Lawsuit Title
*
Case / Trial ID Number
Jurisdiction Code
*
us
in
upc
eu
Category
*
Patent
Trademark
Copyright
Design
Filing Date
Decision Verdict Date
Court / Tribunal
Bench / Panel Judges
Petitioner / Claimant (Plaintiff)
Darshana Mahesh Thatte
Respondent / Defendant
The Registrar of Trademarks
Dispute Summary
The Bombay High Court corrected errors in a previous order in a trademark case, including the petitioner's name and the description of the petition. The court also clarified that the commercial miscellaneous petition, not a suit, was finally disposed of. The corrections were made to ensure accuracy and provide a clear record of the proceedings. This case highlights the importance of attention to detail in legal proceedings.
Outcome / Ruling
mixed
Verdict Document PDF URL
Full text judgment
[Cites 0 , Cited by 0 ] Bombay High Court Darshan Mahesh Thatte vs The Registrar Of Trademarks on 8 July, 2026 P1-COMMP-16-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION COMMERCIAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 16 OF 2026 Darshana Mahesh Thatte, Sole Proprietor of the Unicorn Project Limited ...Petitioner Versus The Registrar of Trademarks ...Respondent Mr. Nikhil R. Dongre, for the Petitioner. CORAM: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE: JULY 8, 2026 (In Chambers) ORDER : 1. By way of a praecipe, a request was made for speaking to the minutes of the order dated June 29, 2026, to correct errors. The matter was reviewed in Chambers and this order is passed. 2. In the cause-title of the order dated June 29, 2026, the name of the Petitioner "Darshan" has been inadvertently mentioned instead of "Darshana". The correct description of the Petitioner is as follows, which shall stand substituted : Page 1 of 2 July 8, 2026 Chaitanya P1-COMMP-16-2026.doc "Darshana Mahesh Thatte, Sole Proprietor of the Unicorn Project Limited" 3. Furthermore, in paragraph No.5 of the said order the words "...the Suit is finally disposed of" shall be corrected and read as "...the Commercial Miscellaneous Petition is finally disposed of ". 4. The rest of the aforesaid order remains unaltered. The original order shall be corrected and made available to the parties. The praecipe stands disposed of accordingly. 5. All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court's website. [ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.] Page 2 of 2 July 8, 2026 Chaitanya
Cancel
Update Case