The Return of Yezdi: Liquidation, Abandonment, and the Right to Revive a Legacy Trademark

Introduction

Since the 1960s, the name and brand YEZDI has gained a great deal of favour as an enduring icon of the motorcycle industry. The motorcycle brand YEZDI gained prominence in India during 1970s and 1980s, for its rugged, two-stroke performance features, and was renowned for their ability to handle both racing and rough terrain.

The recent Division Bench judgment from the High Court of Karnataka has been a sigh of relief for YEZDI motorcycles lovers, as the judgment restores the rights associated with the brand name / trademark YEZDI in favour of those who wish to revive the brand YEZDI like good old times.

Originally associated with Ideal Jawa (India) Ltd. (“Ideal Jawa”, presently in liquidation), which was the original registrant of the trademark/ name YEZDI for motorcycles, the brand YEZDI was later sought to be registered and used through his company Classic Legends Pvt. Ltd. (“Classic Legends”), by Mr. Boman Rustom Irani, the son of the founder and promotor of Ideal Jawa, Mr. Rustom Irani.

In Classic Legends Private Ltd. & Boman Rustom Irani v. The Official Liquidator of M/s Ideal Jawa (India) Ltd. & Ors.[i], the Karnataka High Court Division Bench, while deciding various appeals before them from a 2022 order of a Single Judge in Ideal Jawa’s winding up proceedings, delved into the dispute and jurisdiction issues surrounding the ownership of the trademark YEZDI and overruled the 2022 Single Judge judgment.

By the 2022 judgment[ii], the Single Judge had decided various applications filed by the Official Liquidator (OL), Ideal Jawa Employees’ Association (“Employees Association”), Mr. Boman Irani himself, and his company Classic Legends – all in the matter of company petition filed in 1991 for winding up of Ideal Jawa. By the said ruling, the Single Judge had allowed the trademark ownership and rights in favour of Ideal Jawa, for such rights to be sold and monetized by the OL.

We break down the YEZDI dispute between Ideal Jawa and Mr. Boman Irani in the present note.

Facts of the matter and dispute at hand:

Ideal Jawa was established by Mr. Rustom Irani (its principal shareholder, managing director and the father of Mr. Boman Irani) in 1960s, and sought the registration of YEZDI name and trademark in relation to motorcycles. The company was granted registration for the trademark YEZDI in 1969.

Ideal Jawa ceased operations in 1996 and, upon the filing of three winding up petitions by three different creditors, was shut down in 2001. Pursuant to the operational changes, Ideal Jawa chose to not renew their registration of the mark YEZDI. In 2007, the Trademark Registry removed the YEZDI mark from the Register (on account of non-renewal).

Mr. Boman Irani, the son of Mr. Rustom Irani, registered the website/ domain yezdi.com in 1998, with a vision to revive the old YEZDI brand. As per Mr. Boman Irani, Mr. Rustom Irani adopted the word YEZDI (which is a city name in Persia/ Iran and the place of their origin), and based on an oral license/ understanding from Mr. Rustom Irani, the company Ideal Jawa had sought the registration of said name for motorcycles. Also, as per Mr. Boman Irani, the Irani family had registered the name and mark YEZDI for their other businesses as well (in 1970-71). Also, as per Mr. Boman Irani, after the demise of his father Mr. Rustom Irani in 1989, the trademark rights over the name YEZDI devolved upon him as the legal heir.

Upon the abandonment of the YEZDI registration by Ideal Jawa and removal thereof by the Registry in 2007, Mr. Boman Irani applied for and was granted the registration of multiple YEZDI marks in 2013 and 2014 by the Trademark Offices in Ahmedabad, Delhi, and Mumbai.

It is pertinent to highlight that Classic Legends was founded by Mr. Boman Irani, together with Mr. Anand Mahindra and Mr. Anupam Thareja of the Mahindra group with the goal and plan of action to revive the brand name “YEZDI.” Mr. Boman Irani owned 40% of the shares, while the Mahindra Group held 60%.

Against the trademark claims and actions of Mr. Boman Irani and Classic Legends with regard to the name and brand YEZDI, the OL also wrote a letter to the Trade Marks Registry claiming that the directors/ promotors of Ideal Jawa are making an attempt to afresh register the trademark YEZDI in their individual capacity. The Registry responded to the OL saying that the OL should avail the remedies provided under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and the corresponding Rules. Pursuant to the same, the OL filed the present application in the company winding up proceedings in 2018 seeking court sanction for the sale of the name and mark YEZDI and associated rights thereof. Simultaneously, the Employees Association filed the rectification applications against the registrations in the name of Mr. Boman Irani and impleaded themselves in the company winding up proceedings as a necessary party.

Mr. Boman Irani argued that the mark YEZDI was not Ideal Jawa’s property anymore and belonged to him as the legal heir of Mr. Rustom Irani, who originally ideated and adopted the mark. He also asserted that Ideal Jawa was only permitted to use the mark and that goodwill continued to benefit the Irani family. He further stated that as per the Trade Marks Act framework, if a registered mark is not renewed (under Section 25) and/or is vulnerable to removal on grounds of non-use (under Section 47), third parties may apply for registration afresh.

It was also pointed out by Mr. Boman Irani that in the original company winding up proceedings, the valuation certificate filed by the registered valuer (appointed in 2003) in consultation with the OL had not mentioned the trademark YEZDI as an asset or attributed any monetary value to the brand YEZDI. He further highlighted that neither the public notice inviting tenders for the sale of Ideal Jawa had mentioned the trademark YEZDI as an asset, nor was it a part of the bid submitted by the potential buyer Mr. Aquil Qureshi. It was also clarified that even the sale agreement executed for the sale of Ideal Jawa’s assets to Mr. Qureshi, after the company court accepted said bid by Mr. Qureshi, did not include the trademark YEZDI.

Issues before the Single Judge:

The Single Judge analysed the following issues:

Who was the owner of the trademark YEZDI?
What was the validity of the trademark registration certificates obtained by Mr. Boman Irani from the Registrar of Trademarks?
Could the mark be taken by a third party while the company was in liquidation?

Decision of the Single Judge (2022 Judgment):

After analysing the facts and circumstances of the dispute at hand, the Single Judge declared Ideal Jawa as the proprietor of the trademark YEZDI in relation to motorcycles, and the registrations in favour of Mr. Boman Irani as null and void. The Registrar of Trade Marks was also directed to not issue any more registrations of trademark YEZDI to Mr. Boman Irani / Classic Legends by the Single Judge.

The Single Judge reasoned that the YEZDI mark continued to enjoy goodwill and repute in relation to motorcycles, as reflected even through public interest (including online fan pages). The OL could monetize this goodwill to satisfy monetary obligations during liquidation. The Court also reasoned that, this could also be the reason why Mr. Boman Irani would be motivated to register the mark and capitalize on its legacy. In this context, the Single Judge concluded that Mr. Boman Irani’s trademark registrations were in bad faith.

Relying on Thapsons Pvt Ltd v. Ashoka Food Industries[iii], the Court observed that mere removal for non-payment of renewal fee does not, by itself, confer a legitimate basis to assert ownership. Consequently, the registrations granted to Mr. Boman Irani were held invalid/ unsustainable.

Holding that neither Mr. Boman Irani nor Classic Legends Pvt. Ltd. owned the YEZDI trademark; the Court restrained others from using the trademark YEZDI and held that Ideal Jawa would retain control of the mark during liquidation. It also directed Mr. Irani and Classic Legends to render accounts of profits earned from use of the name and brand YEZDI to the OL. Further, the Court directed payment of Rs 10,00,000 towards costs/ liquidation expenses.

Reversal by the Division Bench (2025 Judgment)

In the appeals filed by Mr. Boman Irani against the judgment of the Single Judge, the Division Bench examined the dispute matter again in 2025. It noted that Ideal Jawa had not used or safeguarded the trademark YEZDI for almost 15 (fifteen) years: production of motorcycles had ceased in 1996, and the Ideal Jawa registrations had expired in 2007 and 2008 without any support or renewal. The basic idea that trademark rights result from use and ongoing engagement with the legal system was violated by such an abandonment. The Court held that “prolonged non-use amounts to abandonment,” rejecting the idea that a trademark may exist in some kind of limbo within an estate in liquidation without claiming its rights.

The Division Bench also noted that there was no evidence on record that the goodwill associated with the trademark YEZDI was associated with Ideal Jawa (in liquidation) in any manner. The court also stated that goodwill of a trademark is “directly proportional to the strength of the business of an entity and that goodwill cannot exist in vacuum for several years especially after all the assets are sold”. Any goodwill that subsisted, the Division Bench observed, was due to the efforts of Mr. Boman Irani, who had been operating the website YEZDI.com since 1998.

The Division Bench also ruled that cancellation, rectification, and restoration are Trade Marks Act procedures. Consequently, the Single Judge’s order instructing the Registrar to erase Mr. Boman Irani’s registered trademarks and reinstate Ideal Jawa’s expired trademarks was deemed to be beyond the jurisdiction of the High Court / Single Judge.

Therefore, the Division Bench decided that rights that the previous owner no longer had, could not replace Mr. Boman Irani’s registrations. Because the appeals were granted, Classic Legends has been able to keep using the YEZDI name and brand of motorcycles with full supervision and control from Mr. Boman Irani.

Concluding remarks:

The dispute illustrates a fundamental tension in Indian trademark governance: the preservation of IP assets in liquidation versus the use and goodwill related rights under the trademark law.

In order to prevent any damage from arising from administrative delays, the 2022 Single Judge decided in favour of business continuity in liquidation, treating the mark YEZDI as a custodia legis asset (or in the custody of the law) with value from the assumed goodwill. However, this in some way made it difficult to distinguish between legally protected goodwill or reputation under the trademark law.

For now, the Division Bench’s decision brought the discussion back to the fundamentals of goodwill under the trademark law being upheld. The decision affirmed that trademarks must be used and the goodwill of the business preserved.

The decision also made a key observation that company and commercial courts have no jurisdiction to resurrect a company’s intellectual property that has been abandoned for years.

Contributed by: Ms. Aditi Verma Thakur (Managing Partner) and Ms. Shubhra Satapathy (Associate)

[i] Division Bench, Karnataka High Court, Original Side Appeals (OSA) filed against the order in Company Application (CA) No. 71/2018 in Co. P. No. 76/1991 c/w Co. P. No. 5/1992 and Co. P. No. 126/1992 (27 November 2025)

[ii] Single Judge, Karnataka High Court, Company Application No. 126 of 2020 in Company Petition No. 24 of 1991 (16 December 2022)

[iii] AIR 1992 Delhi 11, 1991 (21) I.P.R. 257