# AMIT BANSAL vs AMIT GARG & ANR

Court: Delhi High Court
Date: 2026-01-31
Citation: FAO-IPD-37/2021 2026:DHC:798
Petitioner: AMIT BANSAL
Respondent: AMIT GARG & ANR

[Official PDF on Delhi High Court website](https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/68731012026FAI372021_222120.pdf)

## Judgment text (excerpt)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 31.01.2026 FAO-IPD 37/2021 AMIT BANSAL .....Appellant versus AMIT GARG & ANR .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellant : Mr. Vijay Pal Dalmia & Mr. Aditya Dhar, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. V.K. Puri & Mr. Nitin Sharma, Advocates for Respondent No.1 along with Respondent No.1-in-Person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT TEJAS KARIA, J 1. The present Appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Order XLIII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) assailing the order dated 05.01.2019 (“Impugned Order”) passed by the learned Additional District Judge-04, North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi (“Trial Court”) in CS No. 1/2018 (“Suit”) whereby the learned Trial Court allowed the application of the Respondents under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and FAO-IPD 37/2021 2. The Respondents filed the Suit before the learned Trial Court, inter alia, seeking permanent injunction restraining the infringement and passing off of the Mark ‘ ’ (“Subject Mark”) claiming that the Appellant illegally imitated the Subject Mark of the Respondents by using the Mark ‘ATHERMAL

https://niyam.ai/judgements/high-court/2026/january/amit-bansal-vs-amit-garg-anr