The words ‘KONDRU’ and ‘LOBAN’ are Publici Juris, says the Delhi High Court

In a case involving logo/device marks bearing the words “KONDRU” and “LOBAN”, the Delhi High Court stated that these words are publici juris, and that no one person can claim trademark rights over these words. The Court came to this conclusion in a rectification petition filed against a registered device trademark including the words, based on which an opposition was filed against the petitioner’s trademark application. Following its conclusion, the Court asked the Registrar of Trademarks to include a disclaimer stating that no trademark rights would extend to the words “KONDRU” and “LOBAN” in the Respondent’s registered mark.

Trademarks in question:
– The mark of the petitioner in the case is “KONDRU GUGGAL”
– The registered mark of the Respondent based on which an opposition was filed is “KONDRU LOBAN”
As can be seen from the trademarks, both the marks include the words Kondru.


The Court was convinced by the petitioner’s arguments that ‘Kondru’ and ‘Loban’ in English and Devangiri script are generic because they are commonly used, form part of the ayurvedic pharmacopoeia, and have specific meaning for pooja, yantra, and other purposes. The Court agreed that KONDRU” is the Hindi term for resin extract of the Boswellia Serrata Tree, and is a common component of various natural fragrances and medicinal preparations, and that “LOBAN” is the finished product, which is burnt for pleasant fragrance, particularly during religious ceremonies. As argued by the petitioner, the words are generic for Pooja Samagari Goods, Tantara, Mantara & Yantara Products for Hawan as mentioned in Class 3. Based on the description in the ayurvedic pharmacopoeia published by Ministry of Ayush, meaning attributed in different sources, and the long list of products available online, the Court was persuaded that ‘Kondru’ and ‘Loban’ are publici juris.

Citation: Gagan Singhal vs Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr., Delhi High Court, 22nd February, 2024, C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 152/2023, I.A. 8817/2023


Reviewed and confirmed by Ms. Naika Salaria, Trademark and Copyright Team, BananaIP Counsels.


The case note/s in this blog post have been written by IP Attorneys at BananaIP Counsels based on their review and understanding of the Judgments. It may be noted that other IP attorneys and experts in the field may have different opinions about the cases or arrive at different conclusions therefrom. It is advisable to read the Judgments before making any decisions based on the case notes.

If you have any questions, or if you wish to speak with an IP expert/attorney, please reach us at: [email protected] or 91-80-26860414/24/34.