Bombay High Court Allows Kataria Insurance Brokers To Retain Name, Bars Gems Jewellery Insurance

The Bombay High Court on 19 August allowed Kataria Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. to continue using its corporate name “KATARIA INSURANCE”, while restraining it from providing insurance services relating to the gems and jewellery sector, in a trademark dispute involving insurance agent Bhavesh Suresh Kataria.

Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan allowed the company's application seeking vacation of an interim injunction dated 8 December 2025, which had restrained it from using “KATARIA” in its corporate name, domain name and business operations. The Bench observed:

“It would be difficult to hold that... the very same individuals who promoted the Defendant may have used the KATARIA name if they ran the business as a proprietorship or as a partnership but would lose that right if they used the very same name to form a company.”

Bhavesh Kataria, who trades as “Kataria Jewellery Insurance Consultancy”, holds a registered word mark “KATARIA” and a label mark in Class 36 covering insurance and financial services. He instituted a suit against Kataria Insurance Brokers in 2021 alleging trademark infringement and passing off.

The interim application remained pending for over four years. When it was taken up in November 2025, Kataria Insurance Brokers was absent. The Single Judge, therefore, heard only the plaintiff's case and on 8 December 2025 restrained the company from using “KATARIA” in its corporate name, domain name and business operations.

Kataria Insurance Brokers challenged the order before a Division Bench, which set aside the injunction on merits. Bhavesh Kataria then approached the Supreme Court, which set aside the Division Bench's order on the ground that the company should first have sought vacation of the injunction before the Single Judge instead of directly filing an appeal.

The Supreme Court remanded the matter, observing that Kataria Insurance Brokers “did not contest” the interim application and had “simply filed the appeals even without seeking vacating of the temporary injunction”. It left “all contentions on both sides open” for consideration by the Single Judge.

Before the High Court, Kataria Insurance Brokers relied on Section 35 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which protects bona fide use of one's own name from infringement claims. It argued that “Kataria” was its promoters' family name and that its use was consistent with the naming of other Kataria Group businesses.

The Court found the company's use of the family name to be “prima facie a bona fide use” and held that restricting Section 35 to sole proprietorships would deprive individuals of the right to use their own name merely because they chose to conduct business through a company. It further held that the use of “Kataria” could not be treated as “a contrivance to feed off the Plaintiff's goodwill and reputation”.

The Bench also noted that Bhavesh Kataria's own pleadings confined his business to insurance in the gems and jewellery sector. It held that he could not, at the interim stage, claim a wider injunction covering general insurance business. It stated that “at an interlocutory hearing, the foundation of the Suit cannot be widened to expand the injunction obtained,”

Accordingly, the High Court permitted Kataria Insurance Brokers to retain its corporate name and its Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India licence without alteration, but restrained it from undertaking any insurance-related activity in the gems and jewellery sector. It declined to stay the judgment, directed the Registry to list the suit for directions after four weeks and deferred costs to the stage of trial.