##PAGE1##

CNR No : HCBM020258152026 ppn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 25814 OF 2026 IN COMM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT SUIT (L) NO. 25682 OF

2026 Asian Paints Limited … Plaintiff VERSUS Digitally signed by PRACHI PRACHI PRANESH Deepak Kumar Panwar ...Defendant PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR NANDIWADEKAR Date: 2026.09.01 17:51:32 +0530 _______________________________________________________________ Mr. Hiren Kamod a/w Ms. Niyati Davawala, Mr. Anil Shete, Ms. Chandrika Devda, Ms. Stuti Thakar i/b Davawala & Co., for the Plaintiff.

Ms. S. S. Chipkar, Master (Adm.), Office of the Court Receiver.

_______________________________________________________________

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED : 31 AUGUST 2026 P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Hiren Kamod, learned Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff. He submits that while executing order dated 4 August 2026 passed by this Court on behalf of the Defendant, certain persons have obstructed the Additional Special Receiver. He submits that the goods with impugned packaging/trade dress were found by the Additional Special Receiver and for the malafide purpose certain persons including brother of the Defendant objected the Additional Special Receiver in implementing the order dated 4 August 2026 passed by this Court. It is therefore submitted that before the Defendant removes the impugned goods from the subject premises, it is necessary to take the subject premises into possession of the Court Receiver, at this stage, so that directions in furtherance of the ad-interim relief already granted can be passed. Learned Counsel submits that obstructing the Additional Special Receiver in implementing the order passed by this Court amounts to committing contempt of the Court.

2. This Court passed the following order on 4 August 2026 which reads as under :-

“1. Mr. Hiren Kamod, learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff submits that, in Paragraph No. 54 of the plaint, reasons are set out for seeking ex parte ad-interim relief. He states that, as the Leave Petition is filed at this stage, the Applicant / Plaintiff shall restrict the ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a), (b) and (d) and after obtaining leave, will move for ad-

interim relief in terms of other prayer clauses.

2. The Plaintiff has set out the following contentions in the plaint:-

(i) The Plaintiff is a globally well-known and a leading Indian Multi- National Company with operations in over 23 countries around the world. The Plaintiff has been established in 1942 and has premier business house which is engaged inter alia in the business of manufacturing and marketing of paints, emulsions, lacquers, varnishes, wall and wood fillers (putties), undercoats for paint in the form of primers, preservatives used to prevent rust and deterioration of wood, thinners, distempers, dry colours, colouring matter, dye stuffs, mordants, natural resins, metal in foil and powder form for painters, decorators and industrial use.

(ii) The Plaintiff is using the trade name and trade mark ‘ASIAN PAINTS’ since at least 1952 in respect of various goods and services including paints. The details of the relevant trademark for the product apex, which is being used by the plaintiff since 1995, ULTIMA / APEX ULTIMA, which is being used since 2004 and another mark of the plaintiff, ace, which has been used since the year 1999, are set out in the plaint in paragraph no. 10 to 37.

(iii) The details of the registered trade mark (‘APEX’) relevant for the purpose of this present suit are set out at Sr. Nos.1, 3 and 4 in the table contained in Paragraph No. 14, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-

(iv) The sales figures of the product of the Plaintiff being marketed in said trade marked Apex are set out in Paragraph No. 18. The sales figures and promotional expenses for the financial years 1994-1995 to 2025-2026 are set out in Paragraph No. 18. For the purpose of reference, t