Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
JYOTI SINGH
Lumax Industries Limited – Appellant
Versus
Hindustan Auto Industries – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of trademark infringement case. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. procedural delays and hearings in lower courts. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court's intervention on pending applications. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 4. concluding orders and independence of trial court. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 49/2022 & 50/2022(exemptions)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Applications stand disposed of.
CM(M)-IPD 12/2022 & CM APPL. 46-48/2022
3. Petitioners herein were Plaintiffs before the learned Trial Court and Respondent herein was the Defendant. Parties are hereinafter being referred to as per their litigating status before this Court.
4. Petitioners filed suit bearing CS(COMM) 311/2021, seeking to restrain the Respondent from infringing and passing off Petitioners' trademark "LUMAX" and device marks 
and 
and the same is pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court.
5. It is averred in the petition that the suit was listed on various dates before the learned Trial Court where, for one reason or the other, while summons were issued, applications filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for ex parte ad interim injun
Judicial efficiency requires urgent applications for injunction and local commissioner appointment to be heard promptly to protect the interests of the parties involved.
Non-compliance of the Court order by the Petitioners in not taking steps to serve the Respondent - Learned Trial Court to hear the two applications before the summons in the suit and notice in the ap....
The court has the discretion to grant exemptions from serving advance notice and can direct the trial court to take up a matter at an early date for consideration.
The court emphasized that adjournments in trademark disputes should not impede timely resolution and encouraged swift proceedings without prejudicing the merits of the case.
The main legal point established is that the appointment of a Local Commissioner should be at the correct address where the offending goods are stored to serve the purpose of the injunction.
The court affirmed that in cases of ex parte orders, subsequent factual discoveries warrant revisiting previous orders to ensure proper execution and uphold the efficacy of injunctions.
The legal principle established is that ex-parte ad-interim injunctions against unknown defendants must comply with the obligations imposed by law, and the Court must ensure the compliance.
The court emphasized the necessity for timely decisions on ex parte injunctions, affirming the right of appellants to use trademarks without undue delay.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
