$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 2 December 2025 Pronounced on: 15 December 2025 + FAO(OS) (COMM) 105/2019 & CM APPL. 22368/2019 LEAYAN GLOBAL PVT LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Shravan Kumar Bansal, Mr. Rishi Bansal, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Pankaj Kumar and Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advs.

versus BATA INDIA LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Neeraj Grover, Mr. Kashish Sethi, Ms. Harshita Chawla, Mr. Angad Deep Singh and Ms. Mohana Sarkar, Advs.

+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 193/2019 BATA INDIA LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Neeraj Grover, Mr. Kashish Sethi, Ms. Harshita Chawla, Mr. Angad Deep Singh and Ms. Mohana Sarkar, Advs. versus CHAWLA BOOT HOUSE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shravan Kumar Bansal, Mr. Rishi Bansal, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Pankaj Kumar and Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advs.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA % JUDGMENT

15.12.2025 The lis

1. CS (Comm) 110/2019, 1“thesuit”hereinafter, instituted by Bata India Ltd, CORAM: against Leayan Global Pvt Ltd, 3“Leayan”hereinafter, is presently pending before a learned Single Judge on the Intellectual Property Division of this Court.

2. Bata has alleged, in the suit, that Leayan, by use of the mark POWER FLEX, for footwear, has infringed the mark POWER, which is the registered trademark of Bata in respect of footwear. Bata has, therefore, in the suit, prayed for a decree of permanent injunction, restraining Leayan from using any mark of which POWER constitutes a dominant part in respect of footwear or other allied goods.

3. Bata also filed, in the suit, IA 3051/2019 seeking interlocutory injunction against Leayan, pending disposal of the suit from using the mark POWER FLEX or any other mark which may be identical or deceptively similar to the Bata’s mark POWER.

4. On 27 February 2019, the learned Single Judge passed an ex parte ad interim order, restraining Leayan from using the mark POWER in respect of footwear either on its own or in combination

2“Bata”hereinafter

with any other word till the next date of hearing.

5. Bata had further prayed that Leayan be also restrained from using the expression POWER OF REAL LEATHER. However, the learned Single Judge deferred the decision on this request till completion of pleadings on the application, merely stating that, in the said tagline, no undue emphasis would be placed on the word “POWER”. Leayan was also granted liberty to move the Court for disposal of existing stocks.

6. Leayan moved IA 4472/2019 for being permitted to sell the existing stocks of the allegedly infringing goods. A stock statement was stated to have been filed with the documents filed by Leayan, which indicated 38415 pairs of footwear lying in stock. The learned Single Judge granted the prayer for disposal of the stock in the following terms on 27 March 2019 :

“5. The Defendants were given liberty to move an application for disposal of any existing stock. Since this was stock which was already manufactured by the Defendants, prior to the grant of injunction on 27^th February, 2019, the Defendant is permitted to dispose of the stock as mentioned in the statements subject to the followingconditions:

(i) The Defendants are directed to file monthly statement ofdisposal ofthesaidstock;

(ii) Defendants shall file an affidavit in respect of the valueofthesaidstockwhichis disposedof;

(iii) No fresh manufacturing is permitted with the impugnedmarks.

6. The permission to dispose of the stock is subject to further orders in the interim injunction application which is listed for hearing on3rdApril 2019.”

7. Leayan also filed IA 3686/2019 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908⁴ for vacation of the ex parte ad interim order dated 27 February 2019 passed by the learned Single

Judge.

8. The learned Single Judge, by order dated 16 April 2019, disposed of IA 3051/2019 filed by Bata under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC and IA 3686/2019 filed by Leayan under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC with the following directions :