Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Ashiana From Using 'AL KAMDHENU GOLD' In TMT Bars

The Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction in favour of Kamdhenu Limited, restraining Ashiana Ispat Limited from using the mark “AL KAMDHENU GOLD” or any mark deceptively similar to its “KAMDHENU” and “KAMDHENU GOLD” formative marks relation to steel products, including TMT bars.

In a judgment delivered on April 10, 2026, Justice Tejas Karia held that Ashiana had failed to establish any prima facie proprietary rights in the impugned mark, observing that the 2002 agreement relied upon by it did not effect a present transfer of ownership but was, in substance, a licence arrangement contingent upon registration.

“Therefore, permitting AIL to continue use of the Impugned Mark is likely to cause irreparable harm to KL. Accordingly, KL has established prima facie case for infringement and passing off, warranting the grant of an interim injunction in favour of KL and against the Defendants in the KL Suit.” the court held.

The dispute arose from cross-suits filed by both parties. While Ashiana alleged passing off of its products under the mark “AL KAMDHENU GOLD”, Kamdhenu accused it of infringing its registered trademarks and passing off its goods.

Kamdhenu contended that Ashiana was only a licensee and that any use of the mark enured to its benefit as the registered proprietor. Ashiana, on the other hand, claimed rights under the 2002 agreement and asserted long-standing use of the mark.

Examining the agreement, the court held that Ashiana's claim to ownership was expressly contingent on registration, which was never obtained. It also noted that the control retained by Kamdhenu over the use of the mark indicated a licensor-licensee relationship rather than an assignment.

Referring to Section 48(2) of the Trade Marks Act, the Court held that use of a mark by a permitted user enures to the benefit of the registered proprietor and cannot be relied upon to claim independent prior user rights.

The court further observed, prima facie, that the 2021 agreement altered the parties' commercial relationship and indicated a shift from the earlier contractual regime.

In view of these findings, the court restrained Ashiana Ispat Limited and its associated entities from manufacturing, selling, or advertising goods under the impugned mark or any deceptively similar mark and declined to grant interim relief in its favour, holding that it had failed to establish a prima facie case of prior user or independent goodwill.