Vishal Gupta & Ors. Vs. Rahul Bansal

Case Title: Vishal Gupta & Ors. v. Rahul Bansal Date of Order: 8th May 2025 Case Number: FAO (COMM) 103/2025 Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:3685-DB Court Name: High Court of Delhi Presiding Judges: Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Hari Shankar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Digpaul

Fact

The case concerns a dispute over the use of trademarks and labels related to edible oils by the parties. The respondent-plaintiff (Rahul Bansal) filed a suit against the appellants (Vishal Gupta & Ors.) alleging infringement of unregistered trademarks and copyright labels used on edible oils. The respondent claimed prior use of the name "OM AMAR SHAKTI / SARKAR OM AMAR SHAKTI" and sought an injunction against the appellants for using similar marks/trademarks.

Procedural Details

The Commercial Court issued an order restraining the appellants from dealing with edible oils under the names "OM AMAR SHAKTI / SARKAR OM AMAR SHAKTI," based on the perceived similarity to the respondent’s unregistered trademark "MATA AMAR SHAKTI" and the copyright of the label. The appellants appealed that order. The High Court is now reviewing the legality of the injunction, remanding the matter for a de novo review of the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Issue

The core issue is whether the injunction restraining the appellants from using or dealing in edible oils under the similar marks was legally justified, especially considering the respondent’s unregistered trademark and copyright, and whether the law applicable to trademark infringement or passing off was correctly applied.

Decision

The Court noted a fundamental error in the Commercial Court’s order, particularly that the injunction was granted based on unregistered trademarks. The High Court quashed and set aside the impugned order concerning the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, remanding it for a fresh, lawful consideration. The court clarified that the law of passing off and the principles of trade mark law require careful evaluation of prior user, goodwill, and the nature of misrepresentation, especially when trademarks are unregistered.