SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Del) 510

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TEJAS KARIA, J.
Mr. Arjan Dugal & Anr. - Appellant
Vs.
Mr. Shubham Gandhi & Anr. -Respondent
CS(COMM) 918 Of 2025
Decided On : 29-08-2025

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Chander M. Lall, Mr. Devanshu Khanna, Ms. Harsshita Pothiraj, Mr. Partheshwar Singh and Ms. Annanya Mehen, Advocates.

The court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction for copyright infringement, emphasizing urgency, irreparable harm, and the protection of proprietary client data.

Headnote:(A) Copyright Act, 1957 (as amended) - Section 12A of the CC Act, 2015 - Immediate ex-parte ad-interim injunction - Plaintiffs established a prima facie case of copyright infringement against the defendants who misappropriated plaintiffs’ proprietary design and confidential client data, alongside violations of trade dress, causing irreparable harm. (Paras 40, 41)

(B) Exemption from pre-institution Mediation - Granted due to urgency as established by the plaintiff, in light of Judicial precedents. (Para 4)

(C) Confidential Client Database - Permission granted to file documents in sealed cover, considering their commercially sensitive nature. (Paras 13, 14)

(D) Infringement - Defendants not only infringed upon the plaintiffs’ designs but engaged in passing off their goods as plaintiffs’ products thereby causing significant market confusion. (Paras 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 38, 39) (E) Injuctive Relief - Balance of convenience and irreparable harm favored the plaintiffs, hence injunction against the defendants' activities was warranted. (Para 40) (F) Continuation of proceedings - The matter is to be taken forward with specific timelines for document filing and service processes dictated by the court. (Paras 22, 25, 52)

Facts of the case:
Plaintiffs engaged in designer menswear contend unauthorized use of designs and client information by their former employee and spouse who launched a competing business, significantly harming the plaintiffs' market position.

Findings of Court:
The court found sufficient grounds for issuing an injunction against the defendants for infringement, while also allowing the discovery of confidential data, emphasizing the need for preserving the integrity and ownership of the plaintiff's intellectual property.

Issues: Immediate protection against infringement awaiting a hearing; necessity of documentation and process compliance by parties involved.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff based on the urgent nature of the relief sought, highlighting the prima facie case against significant market confusion and loss of goodwill.

Result: Ex parte ad-interim injunction granted, with specific restraining orders against the defendants.

Table of Content
1. exemption from mediation granted based on urgency. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. claims of infringement against former employees using proprietary information. (Para 28 , 30 , 31 , 34 , 39)
3. court's findings favoring the plaintiffs and granting injunctive relief. (Para 40 , 41)

ORDER :

TEJAS KARIA, J.

IA No.21337/2025 (for exemption)

1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The Application stands disposed of.

I.A. No.21338/2025 (Exemption from pre-institution Mediation)

3. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiffs seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation Mediation under Section 12A of the CC Act.

4. As the present matter contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1382, exemption from the requirement of pre- institution Mediation is granted.

5. The Application stands disposed of.

IA No.21339/2025 (O-XI R-1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 )

6. The present Application has been filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs under Order XI Rule 1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) as applicable to Commercial Suits under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (“CC Act”) seeking leave to place on record additional documents.

7. The Plaintiffs are permitted to file additional documents in accordance with the provisions of the CC Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

8. Accordingly, the Application stands disposed of.

I.A. No.21340/2025 (Exemption from advance service to the Defendants)

9. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiffs under Section 151 of the CPC seeking exemption from advance service to the Defendants.

10. The learned Senior Counsel for the Plaintiffs submitted that there is a real and imminent likelihood that the Defendants may take immediate steps to dispose of, conceal or suppress its infringing business operations and digital footprints bearing the deceptively similar Trade Mark.

11. In view of the fact that the Plaintiffs have sought an urgent an ex- parte ad-interim injunction along with the appointment of the Local Commissioner, the exemption from advance service to the Defendants is granted.

12. The Application is disposed of.

I.A. No.21341/2025 (for permission to file documents in sealed cover)

13. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiffs under Section 151 of the CPC seeking leave to file certain documents in a sealed cover.

14. The Plaintiffs seeks to file their Confidential Client Database along with supporting affidavit in a sealed cover, which is stated to be commercially sensitive data. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs are at liberty to furnish the Confidential Client Database along with supporting affidavit in the instant Application, in a sealed cover, within two weeks from today.

15. The Application stands disposed of.

I.A. No21342/2025 (Extension of time to file Court Fees)

16. The present Application has been filed by the Plaintiffs under Section 149 read with Section 151 of the CPC, seeking exemption from payment of Court Fees at the time of the filing of the Suit.

17. Considering the submissions made in the present Application, time of two weeks is granted to file the Court Fees.

18. The Application stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 918/2025

19. Let the Plaint be registered as a Suit.

20. Issue Summons. Let the Summons be served to the Defendants through all permissible modes upon filing of the Process Fee.

21. The Summons shall state that the Written Statement(s) shall be filed by the Defendants within 30 days from the date of the receipt of Summons. Along with the Written Statement(s), the Defendants shall also file an Affidavit of Admission/Denial of the documents of the Plaintiffs, without which the Written Statement(s) shall not be taken on record.

22. Liberty is granted to the Plaintiffs to file Replication(s), if any, within 30 days from the receipt of the Written Statement(s). Along with the Replication(s) filed by the Plaintiffs, an Affidavit of Admission/Denial of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top