Meera Chature Sankhari

Meera is the Co-Founder and a Partner at Jupiter Law Partners, where she helms the Trademarks, General IP, and IT divisions. With over 24 years of experience, she began her legal journey after graduating from the prestigious National Law School of India University, Bangalore. Today, she is a trusted advisor to both Indian and global clients, managing complex IP portfolios with strategic insight.

Her expertise spans trademark prosecution, IP transactions and advisory, IP disputes, and IT, data protection, and privacy laws. She is empanelled as a Neutral for domain name disputes with WIPO and holds key memberships across international organizations, including INTA and APAA. At INTA, she has served on the Board of Directors (2022-2024) and co-chaired impactful projects like “IP in Times of Recession” and the “IP Law Firm of the Future Think Tank.”

Recognised for her leadership and domain expertise, Meera has been ranked Silver in the WTR 1000 for 2024 and 2025 across trademark prosecution, litigation, strategy, and transactions. She was also awarded the Women Leadership Award (Law Services) by the Women Who Lead National Consortium, listed among the Top 100 Individual Lawyers by Forbes India Legal Powerlist (in partnership with LegitQuest), and named a Top IP Lawyer by Asian Legal Business in 2023. She also featured among Decision-Making Magazine’s “50 Self-Made Women Entrepreneurs of India.”
An active voice in the IP space, Meera frequently writes and speaks at conferences hosted by INTA, CIPAM, FICCI and others. Her published works include:

• “INDIA: No Requirement to Give Notice of Ex-Parte or Ad Interim Orders, says Delhi Court” (INTA Bulletin)
• “Tracking NFT and IP: The Latest Global Regulations, Notifications & Other Developments” (Lexology)
• “CGPDTM to Abandon Over 180K Pending Trademarks – Grants 30 Days to Save Them” (Lexology)
• “Delving into Designs – Snippets from the DHC’s IPD Report, 2023” (Lexology)

Meera brings strategic vision, legal acumen, and deep cross-border insight to India’s evolving IP and tech law landscape.

• Client: Empyrean Spirits Pvt. Ltd.   End Date: Ongoing Description: Our client entered into a corporate  M&A transaction, handled by the firm’s Corporate Partner, Mr. Debashish Sankhari and team. As a part of the expansion of the business, there was a need to secure the client’s mark in the  jurisdiction of United Kingdom (U.K.). The client intended to use a variation of one of the previously registered trademarks in India. The firm devised a strategy to ensure that the mark is not only registered in India but is also in the U.K. claiming priority from the Indian applications, through the International Madrid system. This strategy was not only time efficient but also cost-effective and helped the client in being able to grant a license in the U.K. and avoid the costs of engaging a local attorney. Previously, we filed several applications on behalf of the client in India, including in Class 43. The client’s main forte being “beer & other non-alcoholic beverages”. As an example,  the mark which they use a “house brand” consists of two commonly used words in two local languages. Because of the presence in Delhi, with the ability to understand both the local languages and being aware of the restaurant businesses using one of the words, were able to devise a strategy to overcome the objections. One of the strategies was to steer away from the focus on the mark and to impress that one component was commonly used and understood to mean something specific in the industry. We overcame the objection during the hearing by relying upon the distinctiveness attached to the client’s “house brand” and the registrations secured for other variations containing the “house brand”. The mark was accepted & published.
• Client: T. Choithram International SA BVI.   End Date: Ongoing Description: Our firm successfully handled the filing of 64 simultaneous trademark applications for a client's house brand and its variations, securing over 40 registrations so far, with more expected through ongoing prosecution efforts. Given that the marks included industry-specific terms and a house brand with surname and geographic connotations, we leveraged our experience to overcome objections during Show Cause Hearings. This strategic approach reinforces the client's brand protection, ensuring distinctiveness and safeguarding against potential infringements in a competitive market.
• Client: Rekhta Foundation   End Date: Ongoing Description: We were instructed to file 12 applications across 5 classes. Each of these marks was a challenge to secure, the reason being that they were either commonly used Urdu or consisted of plain letters and/or common Urdu words. All of these were "word” marks. As of today, the firm has 100% of these to be accepted & published and/or subsequently registered. These marks were filed by a Delhi (NCR) based organization and the words were of the commonly spoken local languages in Northern India. We were able to make appropriate arguments to overcome these commonly used words, because we were familiar with the local customs and the practices of the Indian Trademarks Registry.
• Client: Skincare Industry End Date: Ongoing Description: The Franchisor had provided the client with a draft of the Franchisee Agreement which did not protect the Client's interest to the fullest. The firm reviewed all the clauses of the agreement and suggested essential changes in various section of the Agreement. We further advised the client to ask for further documentation from the franchisor (such as the details of the registrations, marks being licensed, as well as the Operations Manual) to better assist her in entering into the Franchise Agreement.
• Client: A leading publisher of high-quality action and strategy video games, who regularly develops & publishes video games for PC, consoles & mobile platforms. End Date: Ongoing Description: We were instructed to file a trademark application for the client’s most popular and famous mark. An objection was raised by the Registry citing closely similar marks. The client had opted to file the application without conducting a pre-filing search. Accordingly, we filed a response to the objection and a hearing was scheduled. We persuaded the Hearing Officer by relying upon multiple sets of arguments including differences in the marks, industries and even co-existence in one instance. The mark was then successfully accepted by the Registry and subsequently, published in the trademarks journal. The Opposition Period has lapsed and no Opposition is filed against the mark. We are awaiting the registration certificate.

• B.A.LL.B. (Hons.), National Law School of India University, 2001

• nternational Trademark Association (INTA) [Roles Held: Board Member (2022–2024), Member, Law Firm Committee (Ongoing), Co-Chair, Project Report – “IP in Times of Recession”, Member, “IP Law Firm of the Future” Think Tank] - 2021
• World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) [Empaneled Domain Name Neutral] - 2022
• Asian Patent Attorneys Association (APAA) [Role Held: Member] - 2016

• Bar Council of India, 2002
• Bar Council of Delhi, New Delhi, 2002
• Delhi High Court Bar Association, 2002