Hell Energy Magyarorszag Kft v. M/S Real 100 Agro India Private Limited & Ors.

CS(COMM) 614/2024

The Delhi High Court issued a significant interim order in the trademark and copyright infringement suit filed by Hell Energy Magyarorszag Kft against M/S Real 100 Agro India Private Limited. The court granted permanent injunctions and authorized the immediate seizure of goods bearing deceptively similar marks at the defendants' premises. Furthermore, it appointed Local Commissioners to inspect inventory and books of accounts related to the alleged infringement, providing strong protection for Hell Energy's brand in the Indian market.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
CS(COMM) 614/2024
Decision Date
26 July 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 Hell Energy Magyarorszag Kft vs M/S Real 100 Agro India Private Limited & Ors. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademarkCS(COMM) 440/2025

Montblanc-Simplo GmbhvsMs. Jasmin Chandrakant Vora & Ors.

In this trademark infringement suit, Montblanc-Simplo Gmbh sought permanent injunctions and damages against the defendants for using its registered trademarks and devices. The court noted the parties' initial request for exemption from mediation but ultimately referred them to pre-litigation mediation. Subsequently, the defendants assured the court that they would withdraw infringing products from e-commerce sites within a week and were granted time to file an undertaking confirming their non-infringement intentions.

trademark(T)OP(TM)/448 of 2023

T.G.ArumugamvsT.G.Harigopal

The Madras High Court addressed a petition seeking rectification of the trademark 'UMBRELLA BAND' registration. The court noted that the dispute had been resolved through a joint memorandum of compromise, which was subsequently decreed by a lower court. Consequently, the High Court directed the Trademark Registry to allow applications filed under Form TM-P and Form TM-M, thereby officially recording the petitioner as a joint proprietor alongside the respondent. Furthermore, the registry was mandated to implement the agreed geographical division of territory.

trademarkO.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021

M/s. Aarthi Scans Private LimitedvsRt Diagnostics

M/s. Aarthi Scans Private Limited filed a suit alleging infringement of its trademark and passing off against Rt Diagnostics, which was using a similar trade name. The appellant sought temporary injunctions, which were previously rejected. This appeal challenged those rejection orders before the Madras High Court.

trademarkC.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 49/2021

Mhg Ip Holdings (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.vsThe Registrar Of Trade Marks, Delhi

The Delhi High Court heard an appeal filed by Mhg Ip Holdings challenging the refusal of registration for its mark 'TIVOLI'. The Appellant argued that it had used the mark globally since 1933, establishing significant prior adoption. Recognizing this extensive global usage, the court invoked Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act, allowing for honest concurrent use. Consequently, the High Court set aside the refusal order and remanded the matter back to the Registrar, directing a fresh review considering the Appellant's long-standing reputation.

trademarkIP-COM/11/2025 (IA NO: GA-COM/1/2025 with GA-COM/3/2025)

Parul Ruparelia And AnrvsCamme Wang And Anr

The Calcutta High Court dismissed the petitioners' interim relief application in a trademark infringement suit concerning the mark 'PL SUPREME'. The court found that the respondents, who are Chinese manufacturers, had prior use of the mark since 2014. Furthermore, the court heavily scrutinized the petitioners' conduct, finding prima facie evidence of underinvoicing and financial irregularities, which led to the dismissal of their claims based on principles of 'clean hands.'

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