Delhi High Court Shields Indian “LARK” Mark from Rectification Challenge by Chinese Software Firm

Delhi High Court Shields Indian “LARK” Mark from Rectification Challenge by Chinese Software Firm

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a rectification petition filed by Hubei Ji Su Kan Dian Technology Co. Ltd., a China-based technology company, seeking removal of the “LARK” trademark registered by Lark Engineering Company (India) Pvt. Ltd. in respect of software and technology-related services.

In a judgment dated December 24, 2025, Justice Tejas Karia held that the Indian company had demonstrated bona fide and continuous use of the mark and that its registration was not based on any false claim of the user. The Court found no grounds to cancel the trademark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Factual Background

The petitioner, Hubei Ji Su Kan Dian Technology Co. Ltd., claimed to provide collaborative software solutions under the brand name “LARK.” It approached the Court contending that Lark Engineering, whose principal business involves poultry and cattle feed machinery, had no genuine use of the mark in relation to software and technology services. The petitioner further alleged that the Indian company had falsely claimed user of the mark since 1994 in relation to such services.

On the other hand, Lark Engineering asserted that “LARK” has been its house mark since its incorporation in 1994. While its core operations relate to manufacturing poultry and cattle feed machinery, it submitted that its business activities include research and development functions integrally connected with such machinery. These activities, according to the respondent, involve the development and supply of computer hardware and software components, including automation systems, desktops, UPS systems, and related control software, all of which operate alongside its machinery systems.

The respondent maintained that these software and hardware services are not standalone offerings but form an integrated part of its machinery solutions and are marketed through the same trade channels.

Procedural Background

The rectification petition was filed under the relevant provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking removal of the registered “LARK” trademark from the Register on the ground of non-use and alleged false claim of prior use.

The matter was heard before Justice Tejas Karia, who examined documentary evidence including invoices, promotional materials, and other business records placed on record by Lark Engineering to substantiate its claim of use.

Issues

1. Whether the respondent had made bona fide use of the “LARK” trademark in relation to software and technology-related services.

2. Whether the trademark registration was liable to be removed for non-use under Section 47(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

3. Whether the respondent’s claim of use of the mark since 1994 was false or mala fide.

Contentions of the Parties

The petitioner argued that Lark Engineering’s principal business was limited to poultry and cattle feed machinery and that there was no real or independent use of the mark in relation to software services. It contended that the claim of use since 1994 was misleading and unsupported by documentary evidence specific to software-related services. According to the petitioner, the registration was therefore vulnerable to rectification for non-use and misrepresentation.

The respondent countered that it had continuously used “LARK” as a house mark since 1994 and that its software and hardware offerings were intrinsically linked to its machinery business. It submitted that such integrated technological components fell within the scope of services of the same description as those registered. The respondent further emphasized that the petitioner itself had applied for its “LARK” mark only in 2018 on a proposed-to-be-used basis, thereby undermining any claim of prior adoption.

Reasoning and Analysis

The Court examined the documentary evidence, including invoices and promotional materials, and found that Lark Engineering indeed supplied computer hardware and software as part of its machinery systems. The Court observed that these components were marketed together with the machinery and operated within the same commercial ecosystem.

Referring to the proviso to Section 47(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Court noted that a registered mark may be retained if the proprietor demonstrates bona fide use either in relation to the registered goods or services or to “goods or services of the same description.” The Court held that even if Lark Engineering’s primary business was cattle feed machinery, the associated software and hardware services fell within services of the same description.

On the allegation of false claim of use since 1994, the Court observed that while documentary proof of software-related services was traceable at least from 2016, the mark “LARK” had been continuously used as a house mark since 1994. The Court found no evidence of mala fide adoption or intentional misrepresentation. It further noted that the petitioner’s own trademark application for software services was filed only in 2018 on a proposed-to-be-used basis, which reinforced the respondent’s position as prior user and registered proprietor.

Accordingly, the Court concluded that the registration was validly obtained and that the statutory grounds for rectification had not been established.

Decision

The Delhi High Court dismissed the rectification petition and declined to remove the “LARK” trademark registration held by Lark Engineering Company (India) Pvt. Ltd. in relation to software and technology-related services. The Court upheld the respondent as the prior user and valid registered proprietor of the mark.

In this case the petitioner was represented by Mr. Dheeraj Kapoor, Mr. Gautam Kumar, Ms. Manisha Singh, Mr. Abhai Pandey, Ms. Anju Agrawal, Ms. Swati Mittal, Mr. Nishant Rai, Mr. Manish Aryan, Ms. Shivani Singh & Mr. Akhya Anand, Advocates.