Adret Retail Private Limited v. Abhinandan Industries & Ors.

CS(COMM) 302/2024, I.A. 8103/2024, etc.

The Delhi High Court issued a detailed order in the ongoing suit concerning alleged trademark infringement and passing off by defendants using the 'KAPIVA' family of marks. The court granted an interim injunction application (I.A. 8103/2024) by directing the execution of local commissioners' commissions at the defendants' premises. This action is crucial for the plaintiff, Adret Retail Private Limited, to gather evidence regarding the alleged counterfeit products and unauthorized use of their registered trademarks in the market.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
CS(COMM) 302/2024, I.A. 8103/2024, etc.
Decision Date
9 April 2024

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Delhi High Court - Orders. Understanding the court's reasoning in Adret Retail Private Limited vs Abhinandan Industries & Ors. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademark2004(29)PTC522(DEL)

Tata Sons LimitedvsGhassan Yacoub And Ors.

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Tata Sons Limited, finding that the defendants' registration and use of the domain name 'tatagroup.com' infringed upon its well-known trademark 'TATA'. The court affirmed that 'TATA' is a famous mark exclusively associated with the conglomerate. Consequently, the suit was decreed, resulting in an injunction against the defendants and the transfer of the disputed domain name to Tata Sons Limited.

trademarkC.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 86/2021

Modi Naturals LimitedvsThe Registrar Of Trade Marks

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal filed by Modi Naturals Limited against the Registrar of Trade Marks' refusal of their device mark, 'OLEEV ACTIVE'. The court found that the coined word 'OLEEV', combined with 'ACTIVE' and a slogan, was distinctive and not merely descriptive. Furthermore, it determined that the subject mark was not deceptively similar to any earlier marks cited in the examination report. Consequently, the High Court set aside the refusal order and directed the Trademark Registry to proceed with the registration process.

trademarkCS(COMM) 1150/2025 & I.As. 26615-18/2025

Impresario Entertainment And Hospitality Pvt LtdvsM/S. Social Kitchen Through Its Proprietor

The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction in favor of Impresario Entertainment, who holds a registered trademark for 'SOCIAL' used across various hospitality services. The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience lay in their favor, noting the defendant's prior withdrawal of its own application due to concerns over deceptive similarity. This interim order immediately restrains the defendant from using marks similar to 'SOCIAL', including variations like 'SOCIAL KITCHEN'.

trademarkCS(OS) No. 1459/2007 (I.A. Nos. 11230/2007, 13618/2008 & 13619/2008)

Rana SteelsvsRan India Steels Pvt. Ltd.

The Delhi High Court addressed multiple applications filed by Rana Steels concerning the alleged infringement of its registered trademark RANA. The core dispute revolved around the defendant's continued use of similar marks (RANATOR/RAN INDIA) in relation to steel products, despite existing injunction orders. Recognizing the need for factual verification regarding ongoing usage and the disposal of old stock, the Court appointed a Local Commissioner to inspect the premises and examine account books.

trademarkC.S.(Comm.Div.)No.8 of 2023

Old Madras Baking Company Pvt LtdvsM/s.Suryachandra Enterprises

The Madras High Court decreed a civil suit filed by Old Madras Baking Company Pvt Ltd against M/s.Suryachandra Enterprises concerning trademark infringement, copyright violation, and passing off. The dispute involved the use of the 'OLD MADRAS BAKING COMPANY' mark across various classes and digital platforms. Crucially, the court accepted a Memo of Compromise and Trademark Assignment Deed signed by both parties, leading to the suit being settled and decreed without costs.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Facing a trademark dispute?

Arctic's TM litigation team handles ~120 trademark matters per year across India, EU, and UK. From oppositions to infringement actions, we build winning arguments from precedent.

Talk to our TM team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar trademark matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call