The court upheld that 'Lotus Splash' infringes the appellant's trademark due to its deceptive similarity, creating likelihood of confusion, justifying the issuance of a temporary injunction.

JUDGMENT

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

CM APPL. 25782/2024(condonation of delay in filing reply to the present appeal)

1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 35 days in filing reply of the respondents in compliance of order dated 12.03.2024, is condoned.

2. The application is disposed of.

CM APPL. 25783/2024

3. For the reasons stated in the application, we allow this application and treat their reply to the appeal as their counter affidavit which was directed vide order dated 12.03.2024.

4. The application is allowed and disposed of.

FAO(OS) (COMM) 45/2024 CM APPL. 14991/2024

5. This appeal has been filed with the following prayers:-

“a) Set aside the impugned order dated 25.01.2024 and that during the pendency of the suit the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass the order restraining the defendants, their directors, partners, owners, dealers, distributors, agents, stockiest and servants, employees, assigns and all other persons acting on their behalf from manufacturing, selling, importing, exporting, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in Cosmetics, Beauty and Hygiene products under the impugned trade mark LOTUS SPLASH or LOTUS derivative marks or any other identical and/or deceptively similar trade marks to that of the plaintiffs trade mark being LOTUS whether being used independently or with any prefix or suffix till the disposal of the suit.

b) Any such further order as this Court may deem fit and appropriate in the present facts and circumstances of the present case be passed in favour of the Appellant and against the Respondents.”

6. This appeal impugns order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing I.A. 12308/2023 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) in the suit CS (COMM) 454/2023. The appellant/plaintiff being aggrieved by the dismissal of the said application has preferred this appeal.

7. We also note that vide Order dated 11.12.2025 this Court had allowed an application for deletion of M/s. Intercos India Pvt. Ltd. as respondent no.3 from the array of parties while recording the concurrence of the counsel for the appellant on instructions.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

8. The facts as noted from the impugned judgment state that the appellant is the owner and proprietor of the mark “Lotus” and has registrations in classes 3 and 5 with 55 registered trade marks with various designs and devices with the earliest trade mark, registration going back to 02.08.1996. They are also registered owners of a copyright in the logo of the company, registered with Registration No. A-97661/2013, with effect from 10.02.2011. As per the appellant/plaintiff they have a significant amount of goodwill and reputation in the market with sales figures for the years 2021- 22 and 2022-23 crossing the figure of approximately Rs. 529 crores and Rs. 695 crores, respectively. The appellant has also spent significant amounts on advertising and promotion with expenditure ranging for approximately Rs. 103 crores and Rs. 98 crores for the years 2021-22 and 2022-23 respectively. The appellant who is the owner and operator of the said mark runs a website being www.lotusherbals.com. As per the appellant they have also been sponsors of various events and programs including the sponsors of the IPL Cricket Team Kings XI Punjab for the period 2017-23. The details of the registered marks of the appellant are as under:-

9. In the present case the appellant is aggrieved by the usage of the words “Lotus Splash” (as alleged by the respondents) by the respondents for their product which is a face cleanser. As