Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

The Supreme Industries Limited Vs Tarakant Sangwani — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Home
Delhi HC
2026
The Supreme Industries Limited Vs Tarakant SangwaniThe Supreme Industries Limited v. Tarakant Sangwani

Disposed¶21

The Supreme Industries Limited v. Tarakant Sangwani

Delhi HC27 Apr 2026FAO (COMM)/215/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Supreme Industries Limited v. Tarakant Sangwani; FAO (COMM) 215/2025; CM APPL. 49008/2025; Delhi High Court; decided 27.04.2026; coram Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora; 'Sapreme' trademark infringement; interim injunction dated 14 January 2025 revived; impugned order dated 17 July 2025 of District Judge (Commercial Court)-01, Patiala House Court stayed; Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC; interim order dated 11.08.2025 made absolute till decision in suit; stay only on prima facie finding; all contentions left open; appeal and pending application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Interim order dated 11.08.2025 (staying operation of the Commercial Court's order dated 17 July 2025 and reviving the ad interim injunction dated 14 January 2025) made absolute till the decision in the suit, with all contentions left open before the learned District Judge.

Why is it important?

The interim order dated 11.08.2025 is made absolute till the decision in the suit, leaving open all the contentions of the parties, to be canvassed before the learned District Judge. ¶20

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order dated 11.08.2025 (staying operation of the Commercial Court's order dated 17 July 2025 and reviving the ad interim injunction dated 14 January 2025) made absolute till the decision in the suit, with all contentions left open before the learned District Judge.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal could be disposed of by continuing the interim order dated 11.08.2025 till the decision in the suit, with all contentions of the parties left open.

Court's answer

The interim order dated 11.08.2025 is made absolute till the decision in the suit, leaving open all the contentions of the parties, to be canvassed before the learned District Judge.

Ratio / Principle

The stay granted by this Court is only on a prima facie finding.

Key takeaways

The appeal is disposed of.ratio¶21
The pending application is disposed of as having become infructuous.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ.), FAO (COMM) 215/2025, decided 27.04.2026 — The Supreme Industries Limited v. Tarakant Sangwani ('Sapreme' trademark dispute): By consent of both sides, the appeal against the order of the District Judge (Commercial Court)-01, Patiala House Court, New Delhi (dismissing the appellant's application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC) was disposed of by making absolute, till the decision in the suit, the Court's interim order dated 11.08.2025, under which operation of the impugned order dated 17 July 2025 stood stayed and the ad interim order dated 14 January 2025 stood revived. The Court clarified that the stay rested only on a prima facie finding and left all contentions of the parties open to be canvassed before the learned District Judge. Pending CM APPL. 49008/2025 disposed of as infructuous.

A

$~36

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- FAO (COMM) 215/2025 CM APPL. 49008/2025 THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LIMITED

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Tushar A John, Mr. Sarthak Sharma, Advs.

versus

TARAKANT SANGWANI

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Bhuvneshwar Tyagi, Mr. Zahid Hanif, Advs.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA O R D E R

% 27.04.2026

This appeal lays a challenge to an order passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court)-01, Patiala House Court, New Delhi, whereby the learned District Judge has dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

On 11.08.2025, this Court in paragraph 18 and 19 of the order has stated as under:

“18. There is a clear prima facie case in the appellant’s favour. Permitting the respondent to use the impugned “Sapreme” mark would amount to giving a licence to infringe, which would clearly result in irreparable loss to the appellant. The balance of convenience would also, therefore, justify staying operation of the impugned order, especially as an injunction in favour of the appellant was in place till the passing of the impugned order.

19. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the operation of

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:11:17

the impugned order dated 17 July 2025 passed by the learned Commercial Court shall stand stayed and the ad interim order dated 14 January 2025 shall stand revived.”

Suffice to state that the interim order passed on 11.08.2025 has been continuing thereafter.

The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appeal is at the final stage inasmuch as the arguments are to be advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. If that be so, we have put it is to the learned counsel for the respondent whether he is agreeable for the disposal of this appeal by continuing the interim order. The counsel is agreeable to the same, provided this Court observes that all the contentions of the parties are left open.

We make it clear that the stay granted by this Court is only on a prima facie finding.

The order dated 11.08.2025 is made absolute till the decision in the suit, leaving open all the contentions of the parties, to be canvassed before the learned District Judge.

The appeal is disposed of.

The pending application is also disposed of as having become infructuous.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

APRIL 27, 2026/ rt

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:11:17

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the appeal could be disposed of by continuing the interim order dated 11.08.2025 till the decision in the suit, with all contentions of the parties left open.¶18
The court held
The interim order dated 11.08.2025 is made absolute till the decision in the suit, leaving open all the contentions of the parties, to be canvassed before the learned District Judge.ratio¶20

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Civil Procedure Code, 1908Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2¶10

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order of the learned District Judge dismissing the appellant's application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.¶10
District Judge (Commercial Court)-01, Patiala House Court, New Delhi · 17 July 2025
Prior proceeding
In its interim order dated 11.08.2025, this Court recorded a clear prima facie case in the appellant's favour regarding the 'Sapreme' mark, observing that permitting its use would amount to a licence to infringe causing irreparable loss.¶12
Prior proceeding
By the interim order dated 11.08.2025, operation of the impugned Commercial Court order dated 17 July 2025 was stayed and the ad interim order dated 14 January 2025 was revived.¶16
Prior proceeding
The interim order passed on 11.08.2025 continued thereafter until the present disposal.¶17
Prior proceeding
Counsel for the respondent agreed to disposal of the appeal by continuing the interim order, provided all contentions of the parties were left open.¶18

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LIMITED¶3
Tushar A John, Sarthak Sharma
respondent
TARAKANT SANGWANI¶6
Bhuvneshwar Tyagi, Zahid Hanif

Coram

AI extract

V. KAMESWAR RAOmember¶8
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORAmember¶8

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Delhi HC
Decided on: 27 Apr 2026 · April
Registered: 8 Aug 2025
Case no.: FAO (COMM)/215/2025
CNR: DLHC010556692025
Bench: V. Kameswar Rao Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Case type: FAO (COMM)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from V. Kameswar Rao Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bar Council of India Vs Deayoung Jung and Anr.
25 Apr 2026
A. Menarini India Private Limited Vs Mankind Consumer Products Private Limited
24 Apr 2026
Rhino Finance Private Limited Vs Golden Bag Technologies Private Limited
24 Apr 2026
Loreal S.A. Vs Spv Laboratories Private Limited
27 Apr 2026
Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors. Vs Vikram Singh
28 Apr 2026Writ Petition (Civil)
Godaddy Com Llc Vs Mcdonalds Corporation and Ors.
28 Apr 2026

Cite this judgement

The Supreme Industries Limited v. Tarakant Sangwani, FAO (COMM)/215/2025 (DEL), decided on 27 April 2026.

The High Court of Delhi publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Civil Procedure Code, 1908Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2

View all statutes

Procedural history5

Order of the learned District Judge dismissing the appellant's application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.District Judge (Commercial Court)-01, Patiala House Court, New Delhi · 17 July 2025
In its interim order dated 11.08.2025, this Court recorded a clear prima facie case in the appellant's favour regarding the 'Sapreme' mark, observing that permitting its use would amount to a licence to infringe causing irreparable loss.
By the interim order dated 11.08.2025, operation of the impugned Commercial Court order dated 17 July 2025 was stayed and the ad interim order dated 14 January 2025 was revived.

View full history

Bench / Coram

V. KAMESWAR RAO and MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Parties & counsel