MITTAL ELECTRONICS vs SUJATA HOME APPLIANCES (P) LTD. & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order reserved on: 25.03.2026 Order delivered on: 02.04.2026 + CS(COMM) 60/2020, I.A. 5528/2020, I.A. 5751/2020, CCP(O) 4/2021, REVIEW PET.89/2021, I.A. 2866/2021, I.A. 2875/2021 & I.A. 2884/2021 MITTAL ELECTRONICS .....Plaintiff versus SUJATA HOME APPLIANCES (P) LTD. & ORS. ....Defendants Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Plaintiff : Mr. Manish Biala and Mr. Devesh Ratan, Advocates. For the Defendants : Mr. Neeraj Grover, Ms. Meenakshi Ogra, Mr. Tarun Khurana, Mr. Samrat S. Kang, Mr. Vishnu Gambhir, Ms. Chhavi Pande and Mr. Anubhav Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA ORDER TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. I.A. 7185/2026 (By D1 for clarification of Order dated 09.09.2020) 1. Present application has been filed on behalf of defendant no.1 under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1098 (‘CPC’) seeking clarification of the order dated 09.09.2020. 2. Mr. Neeraj Grover, learned counsel appearing for the defendant took this Court through the orders dated 07.02.2020 and 09.09.2020 to submit that the order dated 07.02.2020 was an ex-parte interim order passed in Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:YASHRAJ CS(COMM) 60/2020 Page 1 of 11 Signing Date:02.04.2026 17:57:08 favor of the plaintiff, while the order dated 09.09.2020 was passed after this Court heard arguments on the applications under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 and Order XXXIX Rule 4, CPC. He states that by way of the present application, the defendant seeks clarification of the order dated 09.09.2020 to the extent that the defendant be permitted to use the mark ‘SUJATA’ as its trade/corporate name only to the extent that the permission to use ‘SUJATA’ as trademark was permitted in respect of goods like RO systems, water purifiers and water fil