Manash Lifestyle Private Limited v. Wella International Operations Switzerland Sarl & Anr.

Trademark battles don't always end with dramatic courtroom showdowns. Sometimes, the most effective resolution comes not from a judge's gavel, but from a handshake and a well-drafted settlement agreement. The dispute between Manash Lifestyle Private Limited and Wella International Operations Switzerland Sarl over the mark 'ULTIME SMOOTH' is a textbook example of how cooperation between parties can clean up the trademark register faster than years of litigation ever could. For founders and IP professionals, this case offers a clear lesson: the path to a clean register may run through the settlement table, not the courtroom.

The dispute centered on the trademark 'ULTIME SMOOTH', registered in Class 03 — the class covering cosmetics, hair care products, and related beauty goods. The mark was registered in favour of Wella International Operations Switzerland Sarl, a well-known name in the global haircare industry. Manash Lifestyle Private Limited, the petitioner, took issue with this registration and filed a petition under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking rectification and cancellation of the mark from the Register. Section 57 empowers the court to order removal of a trademark on grounds such as non-use, wrongful registration, or to otherwise maintain the purity of the Register. What began as a contested rectification proceeding, however, was destined to take a different turn.

Rather than letting the matter escalate into a full-blown legal fight over the validity of the 'ULTIME SMOOTH' registration, the two parties chose a more pragmatic route. They negotiated and executed a Settlement Agreement dated 17.07.2026, putting an end to the adversarial proceedings on terms mutually acceptable to both sides. The court's role then shifted from adjudicating competing legal arguments to scrutinizing the settlement itself to ensure it was lawful and not contrary to public policy or the interests of third parties.

The court carefully perused the terms of the Settlement Agreement executed between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 and found the same to be lawful. Satisfied that the settlement was proper, the court allowed the rectification petition under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. It directed the Registrar of Trade Marks to remove the 'ULTIME SMOOTH' mark from the Register, citing the need to maintain the purity of the Register. The petition was thus disposed of in terms of the settlement, bringing the dispute to a clean and cooperative close.

For founders, startup leaders, and IP professionals, this case carries a practical and actionable message: when parties to a trademark rectification petition under Section 57 arrive at a lawful settlement, the court has the power — and the willingness — to dispose of the matter by directing removal of the mark from the Register. Rather than viewing a Section 57 petition as an automatic ticket to a lengthy trial, consider whether a negotiated resolution might serve your interests better. A well-structured settlement agreement can save time, legal costs, and business energy, while still achieving the ultimate goal of cleansing the Register of marks that the parties agree should not remain there.