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...

Interest On Funds Linked To Business Setup Not Taxable As 'Other Income': Delhi HC In VNG Automotive Case

The Delhi High Court has recently held that interest earned by VNG Automotive Pvt. Ltd. on funds earmarked for setting up its manufacturing unit cannot be taxed as “income from other sources”, finding that the funds were not surplus but were directly linked to project obligations. The Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Vinod Kumar said: “We find that the funds in the present case were not lying as surplus but the same were earmarked to facilitate the balance payment for...

Delhi High Court Cancels 'SOCIAL HOUSE' Mark For Non-Use; 'SOCIAL' Not Generic In Hospitality

Holding that the mark “SOCIAL” is not generic in the hospitality industry and that the rival mark had not been used for restaurant services, the Delhi High Court has ordered the removal of “SOCIAL HOUSE” from the register of trade marks. Impressario Entertainment and Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., which operates the “SOCIAL” chain of restaurants and cafes, approached the Delhi High Court seeking removal of the mark registered in the name of Vardhaman Choksi, arguing that it had not been used for...

Delhi High Court To Pass Order Protecting Crocs' Designs, Trademarks and Patent Over Jibbitz Charms

The Delhi High Court on Monday indicated that it will pass ad-interim relief orders in an infringement suit filed by Crocs Inc. against Summersalt Lifestyle Private Limited. Crocs Inc. alleged that the defendant has copied its three registered designs and two trademarks and infringed one patent, while also engaging in passing off. During the hearing before Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, Crocs submitted that the defendant has replicated a range of its footwear products and placed on record...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Bars 'Babu Ji DUKK' Mark, Finds It Similar To Dux Naturals' 'DUX DARLING'

The Delhi High Court has temporarily restrained Babu G Store and Co. from using the mark “Babu ji DUKK Darling” or any deceptively similar trademark, label, packaging, or trade dress for cosmetic products in a suit filed by Dux Naturals. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that the defendants' mark and overall packaging closely mirrored Dux Naturals' registered “DUX DARLING” brand. The way the logo was positioned at the centre, along with the styling and design, was such that an average buyer...

Delhi High Court Grants Dassault Relief Against SOLIDWORKS Piracy, Awards Rs 64.7 Lakh

The Delhi High Court has ruled in favour of Dassault Systemes SolidWorks Corporation, passing a permanent injunction against the unauthorised use of its “SOLIDWORKS” software, a computer-aided design (CAD) program used to create 3D models and engineering designs, and holding that a group of businesses and individuals accused of using pirated copies failed to contest the case. By its order dated April 8, 2026, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that the company had established copyright infringement...

Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of 'Goldi' Mark For Infringing Shubham Goldiee Masale's Trademark

The Delhi High Court has ordered the cancellation and removal of the trademark “GOLDI” (label) from the Register of Trade Marks in petitions filed by Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt. Ltd. In a judgment delivered on April 8, 2026, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that the GOLDI mark was phonetically, visually, and structurally nearly identical to the registered “GOLDIEE” trademark. The court observed that allowing two deceptively similar marks to coexist in the same trade channels for similar goods,...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Against Indian Oil Corporation Over “Acute Reasoning Deficit”

The Delhi High Court has set aside an arbitral award, holding that an award lacking intelligible reasoning is liable to be set aside under Section 34, as arbitral awards must satisfy the requirement of reasoned decisions under Section 31(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. A Bench of Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar held that an arbitral award must disclose a clear reasoning process and cannot merely reproduce pleadings or record conclusions without analysis. The challenge was...

Party Cannot Bypass MSMED Act Mechanism To Seek Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 9 April 2026 held that once a party invokes the dispute resolution mechanism under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 and the matter is pending before the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, it cannot bypass that process by approaching the Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. A Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna clarified that even where the Council delays in initiating arbitration,...

Delhi High Court Blocks Rogue Websites From Streaming HBO's 'Euphoria' Ahead Of Season 3 Release

The Delhi High Court has recently granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of Home Box Office Inc. (HBO), restraining 43 defendants, including 20 “rogue” websites, from unauthorisedly streaming or distributing its series “Euphoria” ahead of the imminent release of its third season. The order was passed on April 6, 2026 by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, who observed that any delay in blocking access to infringing websites could result in financial losses and an irreparable breach of HBO's...

Commercial Court Cannot Deny Liberty To Refile Suit Without Rejection Under The CPC: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 8 April 2026 held that a Commercial Court cannot deny a party the liberty to withdraw a suit with permission to institute a fresh suit unless the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar set aside a Commercial Court order dated 15 December 2025 that permitted withdrawal of the suit without granting the appellant the liberty to file afresh. The Court held: “In absence...

Seat Of Arbitration Can Be Inferred From Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 8 April 2026 held that where an agreement provides for arbitration and also contains an exclusive jurisdiction clause, such clause indicates the seat of arbitration even if the agreement does not expressly specify the seat or venue. A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad heard a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by Pidge Technologies Pvt. Ltd. seeking appointment of an arbitrator in its dispute with Sliksync...