More
    HomeHomePlea against Prada over similar design to Kolhapuri chappal dismissed

    Plea against Prada over similar design to Kolhapuri chappal dismissed

    Published on

    spot_img


    The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed against luxury fashion brand Prada over its alleged use of a design similar to Maharashtra’s traditional Kolhapuri chappal.

    The bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne rejected the petition on the first day of hearing, stating, “Petition is dismissed, reasons to follow.”

    The petition, filed by a group of lawyers from Mumbai and Pune working in the field of intellectual property, sought a public apology from Prada and its Indian arm.

    It accused the fashion label of using a Kolhapuri chappal-like design in its “toe ring sandals” showcased during a fashion show in Milan on June 22. The petition also demanded compensation for economic and reputational loss to artisans and recognition of their rights.

    However, the bench repeatedly questioned the petitioners’ locus standi. “You don’t have the copyright of the Kolhapuri chappal,” the judges observed, adding that only registered holders of the Geographical Indication (GI) tag or actual manufacturers could file such a claim.

    The petitioners argued that registered GI holders such as LIDCOM in Maharashtra and a similar body in Karnataka are government-run and have failed to act in the interest of artisans. They cited similar inaction in past instances involving Banarasi sarees.

    Senior advocate Ravi Kadam, representing Prada, said that a PIL cannot be filed against a private party and that only those vested with statutory rights could approach the court. “Statutory rights are vested with the statutory owner. Only the two registered associations can initiate legal proceedings,” he said.

    The court clarified that infringement claims must be pursued through civil suits and cannot be addressed under PILs. Despite hearing the petitioners briefly, the bench did not examine the merits of the case and dismissed the PIL solely on grounds of maintainability.

    – Ends

    Published By:

    Atul Mishra

    Published On:

    Jul 16, 2025

    Tune In



    Source link

    Latest articles

    U.S. Music Streaming Growth Is Less Than Half of Global Growth Rate at Midyear. Here’s Why

    As music streaming gains popularity in emerging markets, the growth of on-demand audio...

    Original ‘I Know What You Did Last Summer’ Stars Welcome New Cast at Premiere

    Horror movie stars of the past and present hit the red carpet at...

    Magnitude 7.2 earthquake strikes Alaska Peninsula, tsunami warning issued

    An earthquake measuring 7.2 on the Richter scale struck the Alaska Peninsula on...

    Coats Group to Buy OrthoLite for $770 Million

    Coats Group plc wants to expand its positioning as a supplier in ...

    More like this

    U.S. Music Streaming Growth Is Less Than Half of Global Growth Rate at Midyear. Here’s Why

    As music streaming gains popularity in emerging markets, the growth of on-demand audio...

    Original ‘I Know What You Did Last Summer’ Stars Welcome New Cast at Premiere

    Horror movie stars of the past and present hit the red carpet at...

    Magnitude 7.2 earthquake strikes Alaska Peninsula, tsunami warning issued

    An earthquake measuring 7.2 on the Richter scale struck the Alaska Peninsula on...