Asian Paints Trademark Suit: Bombay High Court Orders Forcible Possession Of Entire Paint Factory In Ghaziabad

The Bombay High Court has directed its Court Receiver to take forcible physical possession of an entire paint manufacturing premises in Ghaziabad.

The direction came after an Additional Special Receiver was allegedly obstructed while executing an earlier injunction order.

Justice Madhav J. Jamdar passed the direction on August 31 in a commercial intellectual property dispute involving Asian Paints Limited and Deepak Kumar Panwar, who operates Akshay Paints Industries in Ghaziabad.

The court recorded that Panwar's brother, Amit Panwar, who identified himself as an advocate, and others had allegedly prevented the Additional Special Receiver from executing the earlier order. It prima facie found that their conduct interfered with the administration of justice.

The dispute concerns packaging and trade dress used for paint products. In an order dated August 4, the court found that the impugned marks and packaging allegedly copied the “essential and memorable features” of Asian Paints' artistic packages and trade dresses. These included the colour scheme, layout, style, and get-up.

The court recorded that a “very strong prima facie case” had been made out and granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction.

The marks specifically compared in that order included ULTIMA and ULTIMATE, as well as APEX and AFEX. The injunction restrained the use of the impugned packaging and trade dress. It also prohibited related manufacturing, marketing and other dealings.

To implement that order, Advocate Deepak Khandelwal had been appointed as an Additional Special Receiver. He visited the premises of Akshay Paints Industries at Khasra No. 1177, Shed No. 3, Sihani Baba Nagar, Meerut Road, Ghaziabad, along with officials from Nandgram Police Station.

According to his report, he was prevented from carrying out the court's directions by Amit Panwar. Panwar identified himself as an advocate and as the brother of Deepak Kumar Panwar.

The Receiver's report recorded that certain goods and packaging material were found at the premises. These included empty sacks bearing the word “ULTIMATE”. Stickers or labels marked “ULTIMATE”, “ULTIMATE INTERIOR EMULSION” and “ULTIMATE ACRYLIC DISTEMPER” were also found. Empty buckets marked “ULTIMATE ACRYLIC DISTEMPER” and empty sacks bearing “AFEX” were also recorded.

The report further recorded that Amit Panwar arrived with around ten others. They claimed to be advocates representing Panwar. They questioned the authenticity and validity of the August 4 order and raised objections about its notice, uploading and execution.

The Receiver recorded allegations that the group called the order forged and the execution fraudulent. The report also stated that they resisted his attempts to proceed.

According to the report, the group insisted that the Receiver should not seize the allegedly infringing material. They allegedly wanted him to report that no such material had been found. The Receiver declined and maintained that he was duty-bound to execute the court's order and submit an accurate report.

The report also contained allegations of a confrontation involving representatives of Asian Paints. It recorded that two mobile phones were forcibly taken from the representatives. Photographs and videos were allegedly deleted following police intervention. The phones were later returned. The report further referred to pushing and shoving during the incident.

Asian Paints' counsel, Advocate Hiren Kamod, argued that the obstruction warranted contempt proceedings. He also submitted that possession of the premises was necessary to ensure that the injunction could actually be implemented. The court accepted, at the prima facie stage, that the circumstances recorded by the Additional Special Receiver showed interference with the administration of justice.

The court therefore directed the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, to take forcible physical possession of the entire premises at Akshay Paints Industries. It authorised the Receiver to break open the locks, if necessary.

Possession was directed to be taken on an “as is what is, where is and whatever there is” basis until further orders.

Nandgram Police Station was directed to provide assistance and protection for executing the order. The Receiver was also directed to prepare an inventory. Asian Paints was directed to bear the Receiver's expenses and provide security for the premises and material.

The court also found a prima facie case for issuing contempt notice against Amit Panwar and his ten associates. Giving Amit Panwar an opportunity to respond, the court directed him to remain present and file his reply to the Receiver's report.

The matter has been posted for September 10, 2026 at 3 p.m.