Common Judgment: (V. Ramasubramanian, J.)

The writ appeal, 2 writ petitions and 4 civil revision petitions arise out of a cobweb of litigation, in which, the word “Maharaja” and his caricature are caught in a triangular contest.

2. The parties involved in this contest, carry on business in the sale of rice and grains, under the brand name “MAHARAJA’ with or without a caricature/device of a Maharaja. Since they are arrayed in different positions in the writ appeal, writ petitions and civil revision petitions, their description as petitioners or respondents would defy uniformity and would only create confusion. Therefore, they are referred to herein, as the “Delhi Party”, “Tindivanam Party” and “Kangayam Party”, for the sake of convenience, since they have their head offices at Delhi, Tindivanam (Villupuram District, Tamilnadu) and Kangayam (Erode District, Tamilnadu) respectively.

3. Since the parties hereto have wielded against one another, almost all the weapons available under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, such as (i) opposition for registration, (ii) Assignment (iii) appeals and review petitions before the Appellate Board, (iv) rectification petition, (v) petition for pros