M/S Virchand Narshi vs Birchand Nassi Cotton Private Limited & … on 19 June, 2026

    0
    6
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Delhi High Court – Orders

    M/S Virchand Narshi vs Birchand Nassi Cotton Private Limited & … on 19 June, 2026

                              $~52
                              *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHIAT NEW DELHI
                              +     CS(COMM) 666/2026
                                    M/S VIRCHAND NARSHI                            .....Plaintiff
                                                     Through: Ms. Shreya Sethi, Mr. Harish Kumar,
                                                                & Mr. Anirudh Bhatia, Advs.
                                                     versus
                                    BIRCHAND NASSI COTTON PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR
                                                                                   .....Defendants
                                                     Through: Nemo.
                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
                                                     ORDER
    

    % 19.06.2026
    I.A. No.16076/2026 (Exemption from filing clear copies of documents)

    1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

    SPONSORED

    2. The Application stands disposed of.

    I.A. 16075/2026 (Extension of time from filing the court fees)

    3. This is an application seeking extension of time for filing the Court
    fees.

    4. List this application with CS (COMM) 666/2026 on 24.08.2026.

    I.A. 16077/2026 (to file lengthy list of dates)

    5. This is an application seeking permission to file lengthy list of dates.

    6. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The
    Application is disposed of.

    I.A. No.16074/2026 (Exemption from pre-litigation Mediation)

    7. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from
    instituting pre-litigation Mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial
    Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter’CC Act‘).

    8. As the present matter contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 1 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi, 2023
    SCC OnLine SC 1382, exemption from the requirement of pre-institution
    Mediation is granted.

    9. The Application stands disposed of.

    I.A. 16079/2026 (Exemption from advance service to the Defendants)

    10. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff under Section 151 of the
    Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter’CPC‘), seeking exemption from
    advance service to the Defendants.

    11. Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff submitted that there is a real and
    imminent likelihood that the Defendants may take immediate steps to dispose
    of, conceal or suppress its infringing business operations and digital
    footprints.

    12. In view of the fact that the Plaintiff have sought an urgent ex-parte
    ad-interim injunction along with the appointment of the Local
    Commissioners, the exemption from advance service to the Defendants is
    granted.

    13. The Application is disposed of.

    CS (COMM) 666/2026

    14. Let the Plaint be registered as a Suit.

    15. Issue Summons. Let the Summons be served to the Defendants through
    all permissible modes upon filing of the Process Fee.

    16. The Summons shall state that the Written Statement(s) shall be filed by
    the Defendants within 30 days from the date of the receipt of Summons.
    Along with the Written Statement(s), the Defendants shall also file an
    Affidavit of Admission / Denial of the documents of the Plaintiff, without
    which the Written Statement(s) shall not be taken on record.

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 2 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02

    17. Liberty is granted to the Plaintiff to file Replication(s), if any, within 30
    days from the receipt of the Written Statement(s). Along with the
    Replication(s) filed by the Plaintiff, an Affidavit of Admission / Denial of the
    documents of Defendants be filed by the Plaintiff, without which the
    Replication(s) shall not be taken on record.

    18. In case any Party is placing reliance on a document, which is not in
    their power and possession, its details and source shall be mentioned in the list
    of reliance, which shall also be filed with the pleadings.

    19. If any of the Parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same
    shall be sought and given within the prescribed timelines.

    20. List before the learned Joint Registrar on 24.08.2026 for completion of
    service and pleadings.

    I.A. 16080/2026 (for additional documents)

    21. The present Application has been filed on behalf of the Plaintiff under
    Order XI Rule 1(4) of the CPC as applicable to Commercial Suits under the
    CC Act seeking leave to place on record additional documents.

    22. The Plaintiff are permitted to file additional documents in accordance
    with the provisions of the CC Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side)
    Rules, 2018.

    23. Accordingly, the Application stands disposed of.
    I.A. No.16073/2026 (U/O XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 of CPC)

    24. Issue Notice. Notice be served to the Defendants through all
    permissible modes upon filing of the Process Fees.

    25. The present Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff inter alia seeking
    Ex-Parte Ad Interim Injunction against Defendant Nos. 1 to 2 for
    infringement of Plaintiff’s Trade Mark and Trade dress/packaging.

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 3 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02

    26. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiff’s made the following
    submissions:

    26.1 The Plaintiff, ‘M/S. VIRCHAND NARSHI’, is a partnership firm
    under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.The Plaintiff is the
    registered proprietor of the earlier, well-known registered trademark and

    trade dress ‘MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHALI’
    which are used in relation to high quality and premium cattle feed throughout
    the country.

    26.2 The Plaintiff applied for and obtained registration of the following
    device mark in India, details of which are reproduced hereinbelow:

    26.3 It is stated that the Plaintiff is the prior adopter, user and registered
    proprietor of the earlier well-known trademark. The present suit pertains to
    the alleged blatant misuse of the said mark by the Defendants, who are stated
    to have, through their unscrupulous acts, manufactured, advertised, marketed,
    promoted, offered for sale and sold cattle feed bearing the impugned mark

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 4 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    ‘SHUBH MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHALI’ ,
    from the address mentioned in the cause title of the plaint, which is alleged to
    be virtually identical to the Plaintiff’s earlier well-known registered
    trademark ‘MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHALI’

    , thereby misleading the general public.

    26.4 It is stated that the Defendants have adopted the impugned mark by
    reproducing the Plaintiff’s earlier well-known registered trademark in its
    entirety with the mere addition of the prefix “SHUBH” in small and
    inconspicuous letters, which does not diminish the deceptive similarity
    between the rival marks. The impugned mark is being used in respect of
    identical goods, namely cattle feed, thereby satisfying the triple identity test.
    26.5 It is further stated that Defendant No. 2 was the Plaintiff’s distributor
    during 2022-2023 and was, therefore, fully aware of the Plaintiff’s rights,
    goodwill and reputation in the said mark and trade dress. Defendant No. 2 had
    also executed an undertaking dated 28.12.2023, upon cessation of the
    distributorship, stating that it would not use the mark ‘MOHAN BHOG’ or
    undertake any business relating to the same in the future.
    26.6 It is stated that the Defendants have also adopted a trade dress,

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 5 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    packaging, writing style, stylization and get-up which is identical to that of
    the Plaintiff. The Defendants are stated to have copied the distinctive features
    of the Plaintiff’s trade dress, including the font, writing style, layout and
    colour combination.

    26.7 It is stated that a comparison of the rival products would show that the
    Defendants have copied the distinctive features of the Plaintiff’s product with
    the intention of causing confusion and deception in the market and of deriving
    benefit from the goodwill and reputation attached to the Plaintiff’s earlier
    well-known trademark and trade dress. A comparative table of the rival
    products is reproduced hereunder:

    PLAINTIFF’S TRADEDRESS/PACKAGING DEFENDANTS’ IMPUGNED
    TRADE DRESS

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 6 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    PLAINTIFF’S EARLIER, DEFENDANTS’
    WELLKNOWN REGISTERED IMPUGNED
    TRADEMARK MARKSHUBH MOHAN
    MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHALI BHOGKPASYA KHALI/

    26.8 It is stated that an online investigation conducted by the Plaintiff
    revealed that the Defendants are also advertising, marketing, promoting,

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 7 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    offering for sale and selling the impugned products bearing the impugned
    mark and packaging through third-party websites and social media platforms,
    including www.indiamart.com and www.instagram.com. Select screenshots
    from the said websites are reproduced hereinbelow:

    26.9 It is further stated that the mala fides of the Defendants are evident
    from the fact that Defendant No. 1 has adopted the corporate name

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 8 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    “BIRCHAND NASSI COTTON PRIVATE LIMITED”, which is stated to be
    deceptively and/or confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s corporate name
    “M/S. VIRCHAND NARSHI” as well as the corporate name of the Plaintiff’s
    sister concern, namely ‘VIRCHAND NARSI COTTON PRIVATE
    LIMITED’. It is stated that the Defendants have merely replaced the letter ‘V’
    with ‘B’ in ‘VIRCHAND’ and the letter ‘R’ with ‘S’ in ‘NARSI’, which does
    not diminish the deceptive similarity between the names. It is submitted that
    such adoption has been deliberately undertaken to come as close as possible
    to the Plaintiff’s business and to mislead the trade and consuming public into
    believing that there exists some association or connection between the
    Plaintiff and the Defendants.

    26.10 The Plaintiff’s earlier, well-known and registered trademark and trade
    dress, as mentioned herein above, have gained enormous reputation and good
    will and enjoy the highest and widest degree of statutory protection. Such
    actions are also a misappropriation of the goodwill and reputation that vests in
    it, which constitutes a violation of Plaintiff’s statutory rights and an
    infringement of its registered trademark under Section 29 of The Trade Marks
    Act, 1999.

    26.11 The Plaintiff claims to be the prior user and registered proprietor of the
    well-known trademark and trade dress, and alleges that the Defendants
    dishonestly copied the same to mislead consumers and exploit the Plaintiff’s
    goodwill. The Defendants’ adoption is stated to be in bad faith, disentitling
    them from claiming honest concurrent use under Section 12 of the Trade
    Marks Act, 1999. Their acts amount to trademark infringement under Section
    29, passing off, unfair competition, and dilution of the Plaintiff’s mark. The
    Plaintiff submits that it has a strong prima facie case, that irreparable harm

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 9 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    would be caused to its reputation and goodwill, and that the balance of
    convenience lies in its favour, warranting the grant of an interim injunction
    restraining the Defendants from using the impugned mark and packaging.
    26.12 The material placed on record prima facie establishes the Plaintiff’s
    continuous use of the earlier, well-known registered trademark and trade
    dress ‘MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHALI’ in relation to cattle feed. If the
    Defendants are permitted to manufacture, market and sell products bearing
    the Impugned Mark or any other mark deceptively and/or confusingly similar
    to the Plaintiff’s earlier, well-known registered trademark and trade dress, the
    same is likely to cause confusion amongst consumers and adversely affect the
    goodwill and reputation earned by the Plaintiff over the years.

    27. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel
    for the Plaintiff, the pleadings and the documents placed on record, a prima
    facie case for ex-parte ad interim injunction has been made out against the
    Defendants. Prima facie, the Defendants have adopted the Impugned Mark
    and trade dress in respect of identical goods with an intention to ride upon the
    goodwill and reputation associated with the Plaintiff’s earlier, well-known
    registered trademark and trade dress. Such use is likely to cause confusion
    and deception amongst consumers and result in irreparable injury to the
    Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation. Thus, the balance of convenience lies in
    favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants.

    28. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the Defendants, their
    proprietors, partners, principal officers, servants, distributors, dealers, agents
    and all others acting for and on their behalf are restrained from
    manufacturing, advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, selling or
    dealing in cattle feed under the Impugned Mark ‘SHUBH MOHAN BHOG

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 10 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    KPASYA KHALI’ and/or under the impugned trade dress, packaging,
    writing style, stylization and get-up, or any other mark and/or trade dress
    deceptively and/or confusingly similar to the Plaintiff’s earlier, well-known
    registered trademark and trade dress ‘MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHAL’,
    amounting to infringement of trademark and copyright and/or passing off.

    29. Let the Reply to the present Application be filed within four weeks
    after service of Notice. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed before the next date
    of hearing.

    30. List before the Roster Bench on 27.08.2026.

    I.A. 16078/2026 (for Appointment of Local Commissioners)

    31. The present Application has been filed by the Plaintiff under Order
    XXVI Rules 9 and 10, and Order XXXIX Rule 7 of the CPC read with
    Section 151 of the CPC, seeking appointment of Local Commissioners. The
    Court has considered the merits of the Plaintiff’s case and has granted an
    ex-parte ad-interim injunction as recorded above in I.A. No.16073/2026
    under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC.

    32. Accordingly, in order to ensure that the injunction is fully complied
    with, it is deemed appropriate to appoint Local Commissioners to visit the
    Defendants’ premises at the following addresses:

                              S. No. Particulars                                         Number of Local Commissioners
                                            of Defendants' Address                       Appointed
                              1.                    Defendant no. 1
                                               RAGHAV TRADERS
                                              161, Rana Sanga Bazar,                                   Adv. Garvit Bansal
                                              Chittorgarh, Rajasthan -                           [Contact No:9205948745]
                                                           312001
    
    
                              CS (COMM) 666/2026                                                                               Page 11 of 14
    
    
    This is a digitally signed order.
    

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02

    2. Defendant no. 2
    SIDDHARTH TRADING Adv. Abhishek Kumar
    CO.

                                                Vaibhav Nagar Road,                              [Contact No:9818944043]
                                              Mavli District Udaipur,
                                                  Rajasthan - 313203
    
    
    
    
    

    33. The mandate of the learned Local Commissioners is as under:

    33.1. The learned Local Commissioners shall visit the premises of the
    Defendants as per the above table, to inspect and seize any products, whether
    fully or semi-manufactured, bearing the Plaintiff’s Mark ‘MOHAN BHOG
    KPASYA KHALI’ or any other mark which is identical or deceptively
    similar to the Plaintiff’s Mark ‘MOHAN BHOG KPASYA KHALI’.
    33.2. The Local Commissioners shall visit the aforesaid premises and any
    other premises of the Defendants identified by the representatives of the
    Plaintiff and carry out inspection and, upon finding any goods, i.e., cattle
    feed, under the impugned trade dress/packaging, prepare inventories and
    thereafter seize and take into custody the said goods (finished and unfinished)
    and any packaging and promotional material bearing the impugned mark. The
    Local Commissioners shall also inspect and seize the books of accounts,
    ledgers and stock registers relating to the sale of the said goods.

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 12 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    33.3. Local Commissioners shall make an inventory of the products bearing
    the impugned trade dress/packaging and/or any other deceptively similar
    trade dress/packaging to the plaintiff’s packaging along with any
    marketing/packaging material, labels, brochures, advertisements, etc. thereof
    and provide a copy of the same to the representative of the plaintiff’s;
    33.4. If knowledge is acquired of any other premises than the aforesaid
    premise, where the infringing product could be stored or services can be
    provided from, the Local Commissioners free to record the same and then
    visit the other premises and conduct a seizure there as well; Local
    Commissioners permitted to take photographs/videos of the impugned
    materials, products bearing the impugned designs, and the defendants’
    premises so visited;

    33.5. Local Commissioners shall seize any and all products/materials,
    stationery, goods, books of accounts etc., bearing the impugned
    trademark/trade dress/packaging, procured at the premises of the defendants
    and release it on superdari to the representatives of the defendants, with an
    undertaking that they will not be disposed of except under orders of this
    Court;

    33.6. Local Commissioners shall inspect and make copies of the account
    books/ledgers/cash books, bill books, sale records, invoices and all other
    relevant documents (whether maintained as physical copies or e-records)
    discovered from the premises mentioned herein above;
    33.7. Local Commissioners are also permitted to break open the locks in case
    of resistance by the defendants and seek police assistance, if necessary;
    33.8. To ensure unhindered and effective execution of the Commission, the
    Station House Officer (SHO) or the Police Officer Concerned of the local

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 13 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02
    police station within whose jurisdiction the premises of defendants lie, is
    directed to render all necessary assistance and protection to the Local
    Commissioners, if and when sought;

    33.9. The Local Commissioners, while executing the Commission, shall
    ensure that there is no disruption to the business of the defendants, except for
    the purposes of the execution of the Commission. The Commission shall be
    executed in a peaceful manner;

    34. The fee of the learned Local Commissioners is fixed at ₹2,00,000/-
    each, exclusive of out-of-pocket expenses, travel, lodging etc. All the
    aforesaid expenses shall be borne by the Plaintiff and paid in advance to the
    learned Local Commissioners named hereinabove.

    35. The Commission shall be executed within a period of two weeks, and
    the report of the learned Local Commissioners shall be filed within a period of
    two weeks thereafter.

    36. Compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC shall be done within two
    weeks after the execution of the Commission.

    37. The learned Local Commissioners shall carry the certified copy of this
    Order for the execution of the Commission and a copy of the same shall be
    served upon the Defendants by the learned Local Commissioners at the time
    of the execution of the Commission.

    38. It is directed that this Order shall not be uploaded on the Court’s
    website until the execution of the Commissions are completed, to enable
    effective execution thereof.

    39. The Application stands disposed of.

    MADHU JAIN, J.

    (VACATION JUDGE)
    JUNE 19, 2026/prg/rm

    CS (COMM) 666/2026 Page 14 of 14

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/07/2026 at 21:06:02





    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here