Appeal withdrawn with leave of the court. The court clarified that a pending challenge before the Single Judge to rejection of an application for additional documents would be examined on its own merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~14
SHYAM RASTOGI PROPRIETOR OF SHYAM HOSIERY INDUSTRIES & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Chandra Prakash, Ms. Aindri Sahu, Mr. Abhishek Chaterjee and Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Advs.
versus
HUGO BOSS TRADE MARK MANAGEMENT GMBH AND CO KG .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Mr. Rishi Bansal, Ms. Shruti Manchanda and Mr. Abhigyan Pandey, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
%
ORDER (ORAL) 12.01.2026
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. Mr. Chandra Prakash, learned Counsel for the appellants seeks leave to withdraw this appeal.
2. The appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn.
3. Mr. Chandra Prakash further submits that, against an order passed by the learned Commercial Court rejecting an application filed by the appellant for placing additional documents on record, CM(M)
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AJITFAO (COMM) 87/2024 KUMAR Signing Da te:1 3.01.2026 18:27:38
Page 1 of 2
IPD 4/2026 is listed today before a learned Single Judge of Intellectual Property Division Bench of this Court. He has drawn our attention to paras 6 and 6.1 of the order dated 5 July 2024 in these proceedings, which read as under:
“6. Counsel for the appellants says that he would like to move an application for additional documents which would disclose that sale of hosiery products between 1996-1997 have been made by the appellants under the brand name/trademark “Big Boss” and “Big Boss Double Decker”.
6.1 If such an application is filed, this aspect will be examined on the next date of hearing.”
4. Inasmuch the present appeal is being disposed of as withdrawn, we clarify that the learned Single Judge would examine the appeal against the challenge to the dismissal of the application for additional documents on its own merit.
5. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J
JANUARY 12, 2026/ AR
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AJITFAO (COMM) 87/2024 KUMAR Signing Da te:1 3.01.2026 18:27:38
Page 2 of 2
Shyam Rastogi Proprietor of Shyam Hosiery Industries & Anr.
Hugo Boss Trade Mark Management GmbH and Co KG
C. Hari Shankar
Om Prakash Shukla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
