The Court declined to grant an ex-parte stay on the trial court's order vacating an ad-interim injunction, finding no sufficient grounds to justify the immediate restoration of protection pending a full hearing.

O R D E R

CM APPL. 38503/2026 & CM APPL. 38504/2026

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The applications are disposed of.

FAO (COMM) 163/2026& CM APPL. 38502/2026
(Stay)

3. By virtue of the present appeal under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellant seeks the following reliefs:-

“i. Set aside/ quash the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the Ld. District Judge (Commercial Court), North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi in CS (COMM) No. 10 of 2026, whereby the application filed by the Respondent/Defendant under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC was allowed and the ex parte ad interim injunction dated 06.01.2026 granted in favour of the Appellant/Plaintiff was vacated, and consequently dismiss the said application filed by the Respondent/Defendant under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC;

ii. restore, revive and continue the ad-interim injunction order dated 06.01.2026 passed by the Ld. Trial Court in favour of the Appellant/Plaintiff;

iii. restrain the Respondent/Defendant, its partners, proprietors, officers, servants, agents, dealers, distributors, stockists and all others acting for and on its behalf from manufacturing, stocking, selling, offering for sale, advertising, marketing, distributing or in any manner dealing in goods [[IMG_1]]bearing the impugned mark “MURPHY”, or any other mark identical with or deceptively similar to the Appellant’s mark, during the pendency of the suit;

iv. pending the hearing and final disposal of the present appeal, stay the operation and effect of the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 and grant interim protection in terms of prayers (b) and (c) hereinabove;

v. pending hearing and final disposal of the present appeal, stay further proceedings qua adjudication of the applications arising from the impugned order in CS (COMM) No. 10 of 2026 or pass such orders as may be necessary to preserve the subject matter of the appeal.

vi. pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

4. Learned senior counsel for the appellant primarily submits that the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 is liable to be vacated as the learned Trial Court has not taken into consideration the facts as also the valid registration of the appellant.

5. Though this Court has heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant, however no case of ex-parte ad interim injunction of the impugned order is made out.

6. Upon the appellant taking requisite steps within a period of one week, issue notice to respondent by all permissible modes.

7. Keeping in view the nature of the facts and disputes involved, the parties are hereby called upon to file their respective written synopsis instead of reply/ rejoinder not exceeding five pages, giving a chronological list of dates and events and relevant documents, if any, alongwith duly highlighted judgments setting out the propositions of law therein, they wish to rely upon at least one week prior to the next date of hearing.

8. Renotify on 14.09.2026 before Roster Bench.