$~44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 07.04.2026 + FAO (COMM) 79/2026 & CM APPL. 17286/2026 RITIK KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Vinay P. Tripathi, Mr. Abhinav Jaganathan and Ms. Preeti Shukla, Advocates versus R.H. AGRO OVERSEAS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Swathi Sukumar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Rima Majumdar, Ms. Deboleena Dutta, Ms. Prashni Kathuria, Mrs. Bindra Rana and Mr.

Vikrant Rana, Advocates CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J. (ORAL)

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant/defendant assailing the order dated 02.02.2026 [‘impugned order’] passed by the Ld. District Judge (Commercial)-02, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi [‘Trial Court’] in CS (Comm) No. 127 of 2026 titled ‘R.H. Agro Overseas v. Shri Ritik Kumar and Anr.’

2. By way of the impugned order, the Trial Court, proceeded to grant an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the Appellant from using the impugned mark NAFEEZA as well as the impugned Label/trade-dress in exercise of its jurisdiction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [‘CPC’]. Th