Back
The has extended an over the “THUNDER 15000” beer trademark to cover Delhi-based importer and distributor , after the firm admitted to importing and distributing the product under a contractual arrangement with the original defendant.
Justice Tejas Karia, presiding over the suit filed by , added Supar SIP Traders as a party and directed it to be bound by the injunction granted on , against and another defendant. The order marks a significant step in enforcing trademark rights against downstream supply-chain entities that handle infringing goods.
Importer Admitted Contractual Arrangement
initially sued Kinjore Brewery and another entity over the use of the “THUNDER 15000” mark, securing an from the court on . Shortly afterward, Inbrew discovered that Supar SIP Traders had obtained an from the on , and was actively importing and distributing beer under the same mark within the capital.
Inbrew moved to implead the firm, amend its plaint, and extend the injunction. Supar SIP Traders opposed the application, arguing in its reply that it was “merely an importer and distributor of the product bearing the impugned mark 'THUNDER 15000' within the territory of Delhi, acting under a contractual arrangement with Defendant No. 1.” It maintained that its role was “purely that of a downstream entity in the supply chain” and that any injunction or decree against the principal defendants would automatically bind distributors, making its presence in the suit “wholly superfluous and redundant.”
Inbrew countered that this very admission—acknowledging a contractual link and active distribution of the allegedly infringing product—made Supar SIP a .
Justice Karia agreed. The court observed that it was “apparent that proposed Defendant No.3 is involved in importing and distributing the product bearing the impugned mark 'THUNDER 15000' within the territory of Delhi,” and accordingly held that the firm was “a to the Suit.”
and
On the question of extending the injunction, the court noted that Supar SIP Traders “has admitted that Defendant No.3 is an importer and distributor of the product bearing impugned mark 'THUNDER 15000' within the territory of Delhi and has contractual arrangement with Defendant No.1.”
Based on this admission and the evidence on record, Justice Karia found that Inbrew had made out a . The also tilted in favour of the plaintiff, as the court concluded that Inbrew would “likely suffer ” if the injunction were not extended to the newly added defendant.
The court therefore directed Supar SIP Traders to be bound by the , effectively barring it from importing, distributing, selling, or otherwise dealing in beer bearing the “THUNDER 15000” mark.
What Happens Next
Supar SIP Traders, which accepted during the proceedings, must now file its within 30 days. The statement must be accompanied by an admitting or denying the documents relied upon by .
The suit is scheduled to come before the Joint Registrar on , and before the court for further hearing on .
Legal practitioners and intellectual property observers will be watching the case closely, as it clarifies the extent to which trademark owners can hold downstream distributors and importers liable for infringement, even when those entities argue they are merely passive links in a supply chain. The ruling underscores that a contractual arrangement with a primary infringer can make a distributor a necessary party, and that an may be extended to such entities without separate infringement proceedings.
For , the extension provides immediate relief by plugging a potential loophole through which infringing products could continue to reach consumers in Delhi. For Supar SIP Traders, the order means it must immediately cease handling the disputed product or risk .
The case also highlights the importance of for importers and distributors. Even a downstream entity that does not manufacture or brand the product can be directly affected by trademark litigation if it admits to a contractual relationship with the alleged infringer.
