Trademark Dispute Over 'Shivling': Court Says Follow Legal Process

Trademark Dispute Over 'Shivling': Court Says Follow Legal Process. Background of the Case
A woman named Meghna Khullar filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. She wanted the court to stop a private company from using the sacred Hindu symbol “Shivling” as a trademark on its product packaging.
She believed that using this religious symbol for selling products was disrespectful and hurt the religious feelings of Hindus.
What the Court Said
The High Court, led by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, refused to hear the PIL. They gave several reasons:
The Court Felt the Petitioner Was Overreacting
The judges said the petitioner seemed too sensitive about the issue. They asked why the concern was being raised now when the symbol had reportedly been used for a long time in this way.
This is Not a PIL Matter
The Court explained that trademark registration issues should be handled through trademark laws, not through PILs. There are already proper legal systems and government authorities in place to deal with such matters.
Use the Trademarks Act, 1999
The Court reminded the petitioner that if she thinks the use of “Shivling” is wrong, she should follow the process under the Trademarks Act, 1999, instead of filing a PIL in the High Court.
Relevant Laws from the Trademarks Act, 1999

Section 9(2)(b): A trademark cannot be registered if it hurts the religious feelings of any group or section of people in India. So, if “Shivling” hurts religious feelings, it can be opposed.

Section 11: A trademark cannot be registered if it is similar to another trademark or can confuse people. If “Shivling” is already a known religious or cultural mark, people can oppose its commercial use.

Section 57: If a trademark is wrongly registered, anyone can file a request to remove or correct it. The petitioner can use this to challenge the use of “Shivling” as a trademark.

Final Word
This case shows that religious symbols used in business can be challenged, but people must follow the correct legal process. Courts will only step in if those processes do not work or are unfairly handled.
The Trademarks Act, 1999 already gives people the right to oppose trademarks that:

Hurt religious feelings,

Are misleading or confusing,

Or were wrongly registered.

In this case, the High Court chose to respect the legal system already in place and showed judicial restraint, meaning it did not want to take over a matter already being handled by the right authorities. 
FAQ's 
Q1. Why did the court refuse to hear the PIL against the 'Shivling' trademark?
Ans. The Punjab and Haryana High Court said that trademark disputes should be resolved under the Trademarks Act, 1999, not through PILs.
Q2. Can religiously symbols like 'Shivling' be registered as a trademark?
Ans. No, if the use of a religious symbol hurts the sentiments of any community, it can be opposed under Section 9(2)(b) of the Trademarks Act.
Q3. What legal remedies are available if a religious symbol is misused as a trademark?
Ans. Anyone can:

File an opposition to the trademark during registration,

Seek rectification/removal under Section 57 if it is already registered.

Q4. What was the High Court’s main observation about the petitioner?
Ans. The Court felt that the petitioner was being over-sensitive and noted that such issues must be raised in the proper legal forum.
Q5. What does this case highlight for future trademark disputes involving religious symbols?
Ans. It shows that courts expect parties to follow the legal process under the Trademarks Act and avoid bypassing it through PILs.

Background of the Case

A woman named Meghna Khullar filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. She wanted the court to stop a private company from using the sacred Hindu symbol “Shivling” as a trademark on its product packaging.

She believed that using this religious symbol for selling products was disrespectful and hurt the religious feelings of Hindus.

What the Court Said

The High Court, led by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, refused to hear the PIL. They gave several reasons:

The Court Felt the Petitioner Was Overreacting

The judges said the petitioner seemed too sensitive about the issue. They asked why the concern was being raised now when the symbol had reportedly been used for a long time in this way.

This is Not a PIL Matter

The Court explained that trademark registration issues should be handled through trademark laws, not through PILs. There are already proper legal systems and government authorities in place to deal with such matters.

Use the Trademarks Act, 1999

The Court reminded the petitioner that if she thinks the use of “Shivling” is wrong, she should follow the process under the Trademarks Act, 1999, instead of filing a PIL in the High Court.

Relevant Laws from the Trademarks Act, 1999

Section 9(2)(b): A trademark cannot be registered if it hurts the religious feelings of any group or section of people in India. So, if “Shivling” hurts religious feelings, it can be opposed.

Section 11: A trademark cannot be registered if it is similar to another trademark or can confuse people. If “Shivling” is already a known religious or cultural mark, people can oppose its commercial use.

Section 57: If a trademark is wrongly registered, anyone can file a request to remove or correct it. The petitioner can use this to challenge the use of “Shivling” as a trademark.

Final Word

This case shows that religious symbols used in business can be challenged, but people must follow the correct legal process. Courts will only step in if those processes do not work or are unfairly handled.

The Trademarks Act, 1999 already gives people the right to oppose trademarks that: