The Court further clarified that the mediation process would not affect the parties' rights in the ongoing trademark suit. If mediation fails, the case will be revisited after the mediation period to consider interim relief. The next hearing is scheduled for March 21.

The dispute dates back to 2015 when the Lodha brothers decided to separate their business interests. Abhinandan went on to establish House of Abhinandan Lodha, while Abhishek continued to oversee the family’s real estate empire under Macrotech Developers.

In a 2017 family settlement, it was decided that Abhinandan would shift his focus to a non-real estate business, while Macrotech would maintain control over real estate operations and the intellectual property associated with the 'Lodha' name. The agreement also included a non-compete clause that restricted Abhinandan from engaging in real estate ventures in certain areas, including Mumbai and Greater London.

Macrotech now alleges that Abhinandan’s firms have continued to use the 'Lodha' name, in violation of the settlement terms, leading to a ₹5,000 crore lawsuit over trademark infringement and consumer confusion.

Abhinandan’s companies, on the other hand, assert that they have not violated the trademark agreement. They argue that their trademark, 'House of Abhinandan Lodha,' has been clearly used in all their projects and registered since 2020. Additionally, they contend they should not be held accountable for any unauthorized use of the trademark by third parties.

At the last hearing, the Court suggested mediation as a way forward. Senior Advocate Darius Khambata, representing Macrotech, expressed willingness to engage in mediation, provided it was conducted within a set timeframe. He also proposed that all parties to the suit be involved in the mediation process to avoid future disputes.

Justice Doctor, however, cautioned that involving too many parties might complicate the process. He proposed that the mediation begin between the two brothers, with the possibility of including other parties later if necessary, to expedite the resolution and prevent prolonged litigation.

The Court then appointed retired Supreme Court Judge Justice Raveendran to mediate the dispute, directing him to first address the concerns of the brothers before involving additional parties.