$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 723/2024 % Date of Decision : 08.10.2025 CASTROL LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Urfee Roomi, Ms. Janaki Arun, Ms. Vanshika Bansal & Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocates.

versus MALANG HAJI SHAIKH AND ANR. .....Defendants Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA TEJAS KARIA, J. (ORAL I.A. 24959/2025

1. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’) seeking pronouncement of judgement against the Defendants / Non-Applicants.

2. The Plaintiff has filed the present Suit seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from infringement of Trade Mark, Copyright, passing-off and other ancillary reliefs.

3. Vide order dated 28.08.2024, this Court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff restraining the Defendants from manufacturing, offering for sale, selling, displaying, advertising, marketing, whether directly or indirectly, any engine oils, coolants, gear oils and lubricants and/or similar/related/allied/cognate goods, bearing the registered Trade Marks of the Plaintiff, and/or Marks and/or packaging that are nearly identical/similar to the Plaintiff’s registered Trade Marks. Further, this Court also appointed a Local Commissioner to conduct a commission at the Defendants’ premises.

4. The learned Local Commissioner conducted the said commission on 09.09.2024, wherein it was discovered that the Defendants were also using new infringing Marks and packaging. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC for amendment of the Plaint, which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 21.01.2025 and the amended Plaint was taken on record and fresh summons were issued. Further, the Defendants were also restrained from using the newly found infringing Marks and packaging.

5. Defendant No.2 filed its Written Statement vide Diary No. 6017439/2024, however, the same was lying under objections. Vide order dated 03.02.2025, the learned Joint Registrar directed Defendant No.2 to remove the defects as per the law and bring the Written Statement on record. 6. Vide order dated 28.04.2025, the learned Joint Registrar recorded that since Defendant No. 1 remained unserved and issued fresh summons to him. Further, Defendant No.2 was directed to remove the defects as per the law and bring its Written Statement on record.

7. Vide order dated 05.05.2025, this Court noted that despite being initially served on 07.10.2024 via speed-post and issuance of fresh summons on 28.04.2025, Defendant No.1 has neither entered appearance nor filed its Written Statement.

8. Vide order dated 22.07.2025, the learned Joint Registrar closed Defendant No. 1’s right to file its Written Statement as the statutory period to file the same had expired. Further, Defendant No. 2 was again directed to remove objections from its Written Statement.

9. Vide order dated 02.09.2025, the learned Joint Registrar noted that the Written Statement filed by Defendant No. 2 had been lying under objections since 14.12.2024, and the objections had not been cleared. Further, it was noted that the application for amendment of the Plaint was allowed vide order dated 21.01.2025 and no amended Written Statement was filed by Defendant No.2. Accordingly, the right of Defendant No. 2 to file its Written Statement was closed.

10. Accordingly, the Defendants’ right to file the Written Statements has been closed and Defendant No.1 has not appeared in the present proceedings despite service.In view of the same,the present Application has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking pronouncement of Judgment against the Defendants.

11. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiff has made the following submissions:

11.1 The Plaintiff sells engine oil and lubricants under its Marks and packaging all around the world, including in India. The Plaintiff is the proprietor of various Marks (‘Plaintiff’s Marks’) in India under which its goods are s