Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 8556
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ, MR. JUSTICE D.N.RAY, J
NITI MILAN PANCHOLI – Appellant
Versus
M/S SAFED PARINDEY EVENT MANAGEMENT LLP – Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12839 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR ATUL SHARMA, MR KUSHAL R SHAH
For the Respondents: MR. DHAVAL VYAS, MR. AKSHAR SHAH, MANAN DOSHI, MR JATIN Y TRIVEDI
The court directed the expedited resolution of an injunction application under Article 227, affirming procedural rights under the Trade Marks Act.
Headnote:The petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeks a writ directing the Commercial Court to expedite the decision on an injunction application concerning a trademark dispute. The petitioner asserts rights under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, alleging infringement by the respondents during a festival. The petition is disposed of directing the court to rule on the injunction on the next hearing, with specified obligations for the defendants. The court emphasizes no adjournment for the defendants, with a consideration for any counterapplications under CPC.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction invoked under article 227 regarding a trademark dispute. (Para 2) |
| 2. parties have made submissions regarding the status of the injunction application. (Para 3) |
| 3. court orders expedited ruling on the injunction application with no adjournment. (Para 4 , 5) |
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
The only prayer made in the present petition invoking supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is as under :-
“A. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order of direction directing the Hon’ble Commercial Court to decide the injunction application of the petitioners filed in Commercial Civil Suit No. 7 of 2025 on the next date of hearing, i.e. 16.09.2025”
2. The petitioner claims to have filed a Commercial Trademark Suit No.7 of 2025 on the ground that the respondents herein are acting in contravention of the rights of the petitioner under the Trade Marks Act , 1999 in actively engaging into organising Garba during the ensuing Navratri festival under the banner of ‘Sheri Affairs’ and ‘Safed Parinde’. The petitioner further claims to be the registered trademark holder of various trademarks in the name as indicated in the writ petition.
3. Be that as it may, on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it may be noted that on an application seeking ex-parte injunction, notice has been issued to the defendants by the Commercial Court, who have put in appearance, as stated by the learned senior counsel Mr. Dhaval Vyas assisted by learned advocate Mr. Akshar Shah for the respondents herein. The date fixed for consideration of the injunction application is ‘16.09.2025’. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel Mr. Vyas appearing for the respondents that the reply to the injunction application would be filed by 15th September, 2025 and the respondents also contemplate to file an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908.
4. Looking to the urgency shown by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, we dispose of the present petition with the direction to the commercial court to decide the interim injunction application on the next date fixed itself, i.e. 16.09.2025. It is clarified that no adjournment shall be granted to the defendants and in case the defendants do not file any response by the next date fixed, the commercial court shall proceed to decide the injunction application ex parte, however, after hearing the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
5. It goes without saying that in case any application under Order VII Rule 11, CPC is filed, the same shall also be considered, strictly in accordance with law.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
