Delhi High Court Records Undertaking by Shridhar Infracon to Halt New 'Anantara' Trademark Projects Pending Dispute Resolution

In a significant development within the realm of intellectual property litigation, the High Court of Delhi recently presided over a trademark dispute between hospitality major MHG IP Holding Singapore Pte. Ltd. , the owners of the ‘ANANTARA’ brand, and construction firm Shridhar Infracon LLP . The court’s order marks a pivotal step in the ongoing commercial suit aimed at protecting the registered trademark from unauthorized association with real estate development.

The Conflict Over 'Anantara'

The dispute stems from the use of the ‘ANANTARA’ mark by Shridhar Infracon LLP in its real estate projects. While the Plaintiffs, MHG IP Holding, sought an interim injunction to immediately halt the use of their trade mark across all defendant activities, the matter reached a conciliatory interim stage before Justice Tejas Karia.

The Plaintiffs argued that the unauthorized use of their established trademark in the construction sector causes confusion and dilutes their brand equity. Conversely, the Defendants sought to differentiate their position, noting that they had already submitted various project documents to the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) using the disputed name.

A Measured Compromise

The resolution reached in court on December 1, 2025, reflects a balanced approach to the commercial realities of existing projects versus the protection of intellectual property. The Defendants, while disputing the merits of the injunction, offered a strategic undertaking to avoid further conflict.

According to the order, the Defendants committed to limiting their use of the trademark to just the two ongoing projects already in the pipeline, provided they do not initiate any new projects using the ‘ANANTARA’ name until the final disposal of the application.

Key Observations

The judgment captures the court's focus on maintaining the status quo while the legal battle over trademark ownership and infringement continues. Justice Tejas Karia noted the following in the official record:

• Regarding the Plaintiffs' concerns, it was noted: "The learned Senior Counsel for the Plaintiffs has relied upon the e-mail dated 09.07.2025 from the Defendants stating that the Defendants are ready and willing to stop the use of the Plaintiffs’ Trade Mark."
• Reflecting the Defendant’s undertaking: "The learned Counsel for the Defendants, on instructions, submits that without prejudice to their rights and contentions, the Defendants are willing to make a statement that the Defendants shall not use the Plaintiffs’ Trade Mark, ‘ANANTARA’ for any new project of the Defendants till the hearing and final disposal of this Application."
• The judicial seal on the agreement: "The said statement is taken on record as an undertaking and the Defendants are directed to be bound by the said undertaking."

Path Forward

The case has been set for hearing on January 22, 2026, where the court will further deliberate on the merits of the injunction. In the meantime, the court has streamlined the procedural requirements of the case, mandating that the parties file their written statements, replications, and affidavits of admission and denial of documents within strict timelines.

This order serves as a reminder to corporate entities regarding the sanctity of registered trademarks. For the real estate sector, it underscores the importance of conducting exhaustive trademark searches before branding large-scale commercial projects, as the costs of re-branding or litigation can be substantial once regulatory and construction commitments are locked in.