Court exempts plaintiff from pre-litigation mediation and restrains defendants from infringing smartphone accessories brand's intellectual property pending trial
In a significant commercial intellectual property dispute, the Delhi High Court on October 1, 2026, passed an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Ritvik Bansal, proprietor of M/s 7R, restraining Arshu Technologies LLP and others from using the plaintiff's copyrighted marketing materials and the "REZONI" trademark and its variants without authorization.
The plaintiff, engaged in the manufacturing and marketing of smartphone accessories, including mobile phone covers, alleged that the defendants copied its original artistic works, packaging designs, marketing creatives, and branding to promote their own products. The plaintiff contended that such unauthorized use not only constituted copyright infringement but also passing off, causing irreparable damage to its business reputation and financial interests.
During proceedings before Justice A.J. Bhambhani, the court conducted a preliminary evaluation and held that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case. It found the balance of convenience tilted in favor of the plaintiff and noted that failing to grant an injunction would cause irreparable harm. Consequently, the court granted an ex parte interim injunction restraining the defendants, including their partners, employees, and agents, from copying or using the plaintiff's copyrighted works enumerated in Schedule A of the plaint and from using the "REZONI" mark or any deceptively similar trademarks as detailed in paragraph 27 of the plaint.
The court also ordered e-commerce platforms (defendants 15 to 17) to take down infringing listings and imposed a dynamic injunction requiring them to remove any future infringing content reported by the plaintiff. This proactive measure ensures ongoing protection of the plaintiff's intellectual property rights throughout the litigation.
Importantly, the court exempted the plaintiff from the statutory requirement of attempting pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, citing the facts of the case and precedents from the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court. The plaintiff was also granted leave to file additional documents within 30 days to further substantiate its claims.
The court directed the defendants to file their written statements within 30 days and ordered the completion of pleadings by December 11, 2026. The plaintiff must comply with the procedural requirements of Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC within three weeks, ensuring fair trial standards are maintained despite the ex parte nature of the injunction.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to protecting intellectual property rights in the fast-growing smartphone accessories market, where branding and marketing creativity are critical assets. The injunction preserves the plaintiff's commercial goodwill and sends a clear message against unauthorized replication and misuse of proprietary content.
Bottom Line:
Commercial intellectual property suit - Plaintiff dealing in smartphone accessories alleged copying of its copyrighted marketing material and unauthorised use of its REZONI mark and variants by defendants - Court held that plaintiff had made-out a prima-facie case and that balance of convenience and irreparable injury were in its favour - Ex parte ad interim injunction granted restraining defendants from copying plaintiff's copyrighted works and from using plaintiff's mark/trade indicia as specified in plaint - Plaintiff also exempted from pre-litigation mediation under section 12A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Statutory provision(s):
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Section 12A, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order XI Rule 1(4), Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2 and 3, Copyright Act, 1957, Trade Marks Act, 1999
