The court upheld the grant of a temporary injunction due to established copyright ownership and urgency in preventing further infringement, emphasizing the need for protection against irreparable harm.

JUDGMENT :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla and Mr. Debnath Ghosh, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dasgupta and Mr. M. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. SayantanBasu, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. Barman, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.

2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No.1, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, ("Trial Court‟ for short) in Misc.(J) Case No.30/2025 in Commercial Suit No.07/2025 (Lunia Marketing Private Limited v. Jay Baba Bakreswar Rice Mill Private Limited). It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 10.01.2025, the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No.1, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, had granted temporary injunction restraining the opposite parties, including their directors, promoters, shareholders, partners, officers, employees, agents, vendors and any individuals claiming through any contract with defendant-opposite party No.1 from infringing the plaintiff's registered copyright “ARHAM” and/or the composite label attached as Annexure-B and the same includes using identical artistic features, containers, poly pouches, or bags as shown in paragraph 19 and Annexure-F, and any deceptively similar marks, either visually or phonetically, or any colorable imitations thereof and also restrained them from using, advertising, selling, offering for sale, or exhibiting for sale rice products or any related goods from passing off or attempting to pass off their rice and cereal products by using identical labels or trade dress, and from using any color scheme, style, get-up, arrangement or packaging that is deceptively similar to the respondent/petitioner's original design. It is also to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 10.01.2025, while granting the ad-interim injunction, the learned Trial Court has issued notice to the opposite parties.

3. And the interlocutory application is being filed by the applicant/appellant for staying the impugned order dated 10.01.2025, so passed by the learned Trial Court in Misc.(J) Case No.30/2025 in Commercial Suit No.07/2025.

4. As the issues raised in the present appeal and in the I.A.(Civil) No.325/2025 are same, involving the same parties and against the same impugned order dated 10.01.2025, and as agreed upon, it is proposed to dispose of both the appeal and the I.A., by this common judgment and order.

5. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal is briefly stated as under:-

“The respondent No.1 herein is a Private Limited Company incorporated on November 12, 1998, under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of marketing quality cereal products, including rice and spices. The company has its registered office in Kolkata, a head office in Shillong and a branch office in Guwahati and the appellant is also an incorporated company under the Indian Companies Act, 2013 and engaged in the business of marketing cereals, particularly rice, packaged in various materials. The respondent No.1 is recognized as a leading trader in rice and cereals across India through a network of dealers and distributors. Then in the year 2001, the respondent No.1 adopted the name “ARHAM” as its trademark, conducting necessary searches and market surveys prior to its adoption and the respondent No.1 developed a distinct trade dress, featuring artistic elements, that has become well-known, especially in the North-Eastern States of India. The label design includes