The Court noted that both the present suit and the defendant’s suit before the Commercial Court concerned the same trademark “MR COOK”, and held that consolidation was necessary to avoid multiple proceedings and conflicting decisions. Rejecting the defendant’s objection that a pending Order VII Rule 11 application made consolidation improper, the Court reasoned that such pendency does not bar transfer under Rule 26 of the IPD Rules. Accordingly, the Court ordered the transfer of CS(COMM) 866/2025 from the Commercial Court to the High Court for consolidation with the present suit.
Case Law Held (with Para Reference):
The Court held that under Rule 26 of the Delhi High Court IPD Rules, proceedings involving the same or related IP subject matter ought to be consolidated to prevent conflicting decisions and expedite adjudication (Para 7–9).
Arif Elahi Vs. Martin Davis: 28.11.2025: CS(COMM) 59/2025:DHC: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tejas Karia
[Readers are advised to exercise their own discretion as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation]
[Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor (Patent and Trademark Attorney), High Court of Delhi]
