Arctic
Invent
Case Registry
Dashboard
Case Explorer
Back to Explorer
Update Case Entry
Manually curate individual case documents inside the PostgreSQL engine.
Case Lawsuit Title
*
Case / Trial ID Number
Jurisdiction Code
*
us
in
upc
eu
Category
*
Patent
Trademark
Copyright
Design
Filing Date
Decision Verdict Date
Court / Tribunal
Bench / Panel Judges
Petitioner / Claimant (Plaintiff)
M/S Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agro Foods
Respondent / Defendant
Sai Maghalakshmi Traders
Dispute Summary
The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of M/S Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agro Foods against Sai Maghalakshmi Traders, restraining the defendants from using the deceptively similar trademark and trade dress. The court also allowed the plaintiffs to file additional documents and granted exemption from filing certified copies and advance service to the defendants. The matter is listed for further hearing on October 12, 2026.
Outcome / Ruling
interim_order
Verdict Document PDF URL
Full text judgment
[Cites 5 , Cited by 0 ] Delhi High Court - Orders M/S Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agro Foods ... vs Sai Maghalakshmi Traders Through Its ... on 29 May, 2026 Author: Tushar Rao Gedela Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela $~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 625/2026, I.A. 15426/2026, I.A. 15427/2026, I.A. 15428/2026, I.A. 15429/2026 & I.A. 15430/2026 M/S SRI LAKSHMI SRINIVASA AGRO FOODS THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED PARTNER MR. SHIVAKUMAR MACHANOOR KONDA & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Animesh Rastogi, Ms. Neha Rastogi and Ms. Sandhya Mariyar, Advocates. versus SAI MAGHALAKSHMI TRADERS THROUGH ITS PARTNERS & ORS. .....Defendants Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA ORDER % 29.05.2026 I.A. 15427/2026 (Additional Documents) 1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Order XI Rule 1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ' CPC ') as applicable to commercial suits under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ' CC Act ') seeking leave to place on record additional documents. 2. The plaintiffs seek and are granted three weeks' time to file additional documents in accordance with the provisions of the CC Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018. 3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 15428/2026 (Exemption) 4. This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Section 151 of CPC seeking exemption from filing certified copies, clear/legible copies CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 1 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 and original documents along with the captioned suit. 5. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. However, true typed/translated/clearer, certified and original copies of the documents with proper margins be filed within four weeks with an advance copy to the defendants. 6. The application stands disposed of. I.A. 15429/2026 (Pre-Institution Mediation) 7. This is an application filed by the plaintiffs seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the CC Act. 8. As the present matter contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar vs. T.K.D. Keerthi : (2024) 5 SCC 815, exemption from the requirement of pre-institution mediation is granted. 9. The application stands disposed of. I.A. 15430/2026 (Exemption from Advance Service to defendants) 10. This is an application filed by the plaintiffs under Section 151 of CPC seeking exemption from advance service to the defendants. 11. Mr. Animesh Rastogi, learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that there is a real and imminent likelihood that the defendants may take immediate steps to dispose of, conceal or suppress its infringing business operations bearing the deceptively similar trademark and trade dress. 12. In view of the fact that the plaintiffs have sought an urgent ex-parte ad- interim injunction, the exemption from advance service to the defendants is granted. 13. The application is disposed of. I.A. 15426/2026 (Under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2, CPC ) 14. Present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of CPC , 1908 seeking ex-parte ad-interim CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 2 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 injunction against the defendants. 15. Plaintiffs claim to be engaged in the business of processing, marketing, and selling of rice, under the name and style of Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agro Foods, i.e., plaintiff no.1 and SLS Agro Ventures, i.e., plaintiff no.2. Plaintiffs claim that they are one of the leading brands in relation to the said goods and business in the country, and have been delivering premium quality rice with a legacy of trust and excellence and decades of experience in rice milling and processing. 16. It is claimed that plaintiff no.1, in the year 2003, honestly and bonafidely conceived and adopted the trademarks 'SRI LAKSHMI SRINIVASA', 'LAKSHMI SRINIVASA', 'LAKSHMI SRINIVASA SLS' and 'SLS LAKSHMI SRINIVASA', with the image of Lord Lakshmi Srinivasa , in relation to rice products. 17. Plaintiffs, in order to obtain statutory rights and safeguard their inherent proprietary rights in the said trademark/label/trade dress/color combination, have filed trademark applications, some of which are tabulated below:- Application Trademark Class Status Device/Word No. mark 2123068 SLS GOLD 30 Registered Device CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 3 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 6598186 LAKSHMI 30 Registered SRINIVASA (Rectification filed by Defendant No.1 and 2 on 19.05.2026) 6598187 LAKSHMI 30 Registered Wordmark SRINIVASA (Rectification filed by Defendant No.1 and 2 on 19.05.2026) 6598188 LAKSHMI 30 Registered SRINIVASA (Rectification SLS filed by Defendants) 2599228 LS 30 Registered SLSLAKSH (Rectification MISRINIVA filed by SA Defendant No.1 and 2 on 19.05.2026) 1683881 LAKSHMI Opposed SRINIVASA 2599230 SLS 30 Objected Wordmark LAKSHMI SRINIVASA CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 4 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 2599229 SLS 30 Objected Wordmark LAKSHMI SRINIVASA 2599231 SLS LUXMI 30 Objected Wordmark SRINIVASA 2599234 SLSLAKSH 30 Registered Wordmark MISRINIVA (Rectification SA filed by Defendant No.1 and 2 on 19.05.2026) 18. It is claimed that the said trademark/label/trade dress/color combination of the plaintiffs bears original artistic features of placement, getup, makeup, lettering style, sequential arrangements, color combination etc., collectively referred to as the trade dress which also serves trademark functions. It is stated that the artistic label adopted by the plaintiffs is registered under the Copyrights Act, 1957 bearing application no.AT29691/2025-CO, and the artwork of the said trademark/label/trade dress/color combination is the original artwork created at the instance of the plaintiffs who is the owner and proprietor of the copyright in the said artwork as reproduced hereunder:- 19. It is stated that the plaintiffs' website 'www.slsrice.com', which is interactive in nature, prominently features the said trademarks/trade dress and contains extensive information about the plaintiffs' history, products, certifications, customer recipes etc., and is accessible to traders and CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 5 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 consumers within the jurisdiction of this Court. In addition, the plaintiffs also claim to maintain a formidable presence on social media such as Instagram, Facebook etc., and regularly indulge in advertisement and promotional activities through the said social media accounts of the plaintiffs. 20. Plaintiffs claim to have made extensive sale of rice products under the said trademarks and trade dress, the details of which are as under:- Plaintiff No.1 Plaintiff No.2 21. Plaintiffs claim that they have regularly and continuously been promoting the said trademarks/label/trade dress/color combination and the said goods and business thereunder through extensive advertisements, publicities, promotions such as issuing branded notebooks, calendars, carry CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 6 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 bags etc., and have been spending large amounts of money, efforts, skills and time thereon. 22. Plaintiffs claim that on account of long, continuous and commercial use coupled with the efforts to popularize and by virtue of superior quality of the goods provided by the plaintiffs, the said trademark 'Lakshmi Srinivasa' with red packaging and the image of Lord Lakshmi Srinivasa has come to be exclusively identified and associated with the plaintiffs among the public and trade and has acquired enviable goodwill and impeccable trade reputation among the public and trade. 23. It is stated that defendant nos.1 and 2 are sister concerns, engaged in the business of processing, trading, selling and offering for sale, through its network of retailers, soliciting and marketing, trading of rice. Defendant no.3 is stated to be a wholesaler/stockist of defendant nos.1 and 2. 24. Plaintiffs claim that defendant no.1 has dishonestly and malafidely adopted and is using the trademark and label 'SRI MAGHALAKSHMI SRINIVASAYA', , in relation to its impugned goods and business which is identical/deceptively similar to the trademark/label/trade dress/color combination of the plaintiffs. 25. Plaintiffs claim to have gained knowledge about the impugned activities of the defendant no.1's impugned products during the execution of the Local Commission conducted on 18.05.2026, pursuant to the orders CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 7 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 passed by this Court in CS(COMM) 487/2026. It is stated that during the execution of the Commission at 109/3, Quid-E Millad Road Salai, Trichy, Tamil Nadu, the plaintiffs came across the impugned products bearing the infringing trademark/label/trade dress of the defendant no.1. Plaintiffs claim that during the course of the said Commission, it was revealed that the defendant no.3 was stocking, displaying and selling the impugned products of defendant no.1 at its premises and the defendants were found dealing in the impugned goods without any authorization or license from the plaintiffs. On further enquiry from the defendant no.3, it was informed that the impugned goods are being sold throughout the country including Delhi. 26. It is asserted that the defendant nos.1 and 2, in order to harp upon the goodwill of the plaintiffs, knowingly adopted the red color packaging with the image of Lord Lakshmi Srinivasa in respect of rice. Plaintiffs claim that the defendant no.1 is using the same red packaging with exactly identical image of Lord Lakshmi Srinivasa with the milestone and the golden ribbon in 26 Kg packaging. Furthermore, the defendant no.1 is also using identical packaging on the backside of the bag with the same cooking tips in silver color with the image as is used by the plaintiffs. 27. It is further stated that the defendant no.1 has, with malafides, applied for registration of its impugned mark, details of which are as under:- 28. Plaintiffs claim that the defendants have slavishly copied the plaintiffs' said trademark/label/trade dress/color combination in its entirety, and have written 'SRI MAGHALAKSHMI SRINIVASAYA'/'SMLS' in its impugned CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 8 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 mark/label/trade dress, with the sole intent of unlawfully capitalizing on the reputation and goodwill associated with the plaintiffs' said product. 29. Predicated thereon, the plaintiffs seek an urgent ex-parte ad-interim injunction against the defendants. 30. This Court has heard learned counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the material on record. 31. At the outset, it would be relevant to consider the comparison of the rival marks and the trade dress, as extracted hereunder:- Plaintiffs Defendants 32. What strikes at the outset itself is the common red coloured background CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 9 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 of the entire trade dress and packaging of the products manufactured by both the parties. Though no party can claim any right over the image of the deities or their names, however, the manner in which the deities are depicted may form a part of an essential element of a trade dress or copyright in an artistic work. A visual comparison of the trademark/trade dress and the colour combination of the packaging of the parties demonstrates that the placement of artistic features, get up, make up, lettering style, sequential arrangement and colour combination etc. are either identical or deceptively similar. The manner and stylization used by the defendant in placing its trademark/label 'SRI MAGHALAKSHMI SRINIVASAYA' on the top portion of its packaging is identical to the manner in which the plaintiff places its trademark 'SRI LAKSHMI SRINIVASA' on its packaging. The background of the lapel on which the trademark is embossed is yellow in colour over the red background. Similar is the lapel at the bottom of the front portion of the packaging. The rear part of the packaging does not appear to be identical however, the image of the deities along with the photographs of the proprietors and other details may tend to create confusion. 33. It is the relevant issue to be noted that in CS(COMM) 487/2026, this Court had passed an order appointing Local Commissioner and while the Commission was being executed at the premises of the defendant in that suit, the products which are subject matter of the present suit in the impugned trade dress/packaging, were also found in the possession of the defendants in that case . This is how the plaintiff claims knowledge of the alleged infringement by the present defendants. 34. So far as the trademark itself is concerned, the use of the words "Magha" as a prefix to the words "Lakshmi" and the words "ya" as a suffix to the word "Srinivasa" may not really draw distinction to the extent that an ordinary consumer of the products sold by the parties will not get confused or CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 10 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 deceived. The overall impact of the trade dress is such and having regard to the kind of consumers who may purchase products of the parties, it is likely that an unwary consumer with average intelligence and imperfect recollection may get confused or deceived while purchasing the goods of the defendants, believing it to be that of the plaintiffs or associated with them. 35. It is also to be borne in mind that the trademarks of the parties are deceptively similar, the products processed by the parties are identical, the trade circles and distribution channels as also the retailers would be common. The consumers too would be common. Thus, the triple identity test is satisfied. 36. The plaintiffs have placed on record the trademark and trade dress registrations in its favour. The plaintiffs have also placed on record the sales turnover from FY 2003-04 to FY 2019-20 in respect of plaintiff no.1 and from FY 2019-20 to FY 2024-25 in respect of plaintiff no.2. The figures are substantial. The plaintiffs also have asserted that they have promoted extensively their product in the form of issuing branded notebooks, calendars, carry bags etc., and is highly popular amongst the general public for its high quality products. The cumulative assessment of the aforesaid demonstrates substantial goodwill and immense reputation garnered over the last more than twenty years by the plaintiffs in respect of the products processed and sold under its trademark and trade dress 'SRI LAKSHMI SRINIVASA' and other formative marks. 37. The plaintiffs have therefore been able to establish a prima facie strong case in its favour against the defendants. The balance of convenience is tilted in favour of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which may not be adequately compensated in monetary terms in case ex-parte ad-interim injunction is not granted. 38. In view of the aforesaid, the defendants, by themselves as also through CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 11 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 their individual proprietors, partners, directors, agents, representatives, distributors, assigns, heirs, successors, stockists and all others acting for and on their behalf are restrained from processing, soliciting, networking, stocking/filling, marketing, selling, displaying, advertising or by any other mode or manner (including through any online mediums) dealing in or using the impugned mark/trade dress 'SRI MAGHALAKSHMI SRINIVASAYA' or 'SMLS' along with the impugned trade dress in red color packaging and/or any other trademark/label/trade dress identical with and/or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' said trademark/label/trade dress/color combination 'SRI LAKSHMI SRINIVASA', 'LAKSHMI SRINIVASA', 'LAKSHMI SRINIVASA SLS', 'SLS LAKSHMI SRINIVASA' (in red color) , in relation to their impugned goods and business of processing, marketing, selling and export of rice. 39. Issue notice. 40. Let a reply to this application be filed by the defendants within four weeks from service. Rejoinder, thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 12 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32 thereafter. 41. Compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC shall be done within ten days from date. CS(COMM) 625/2026 42. Let the plaint be registered as a suit. 43. Upon filing of the process fee, issue summons of the suit to the defendants through all permissible modes. 44. The summons shall state that the Written Statement shall be filed by the defendants within 30 days from the date of the receipt of summons. Alongwith the Written Statement, the defendants shall also file Affidavit of Admission/Denial of the documents of the plaintiffs, without which the Written Statement shall not be taken on record. 45. Liberty is granted to the plaintiffs to file Replication, if any, within 30 days from the receipt of the Written Statement. Along with the Replication filed by the plaintiffs, an Affidavit of Admission/Denial of the documents of defendants be filed by the plaintiff, without which the Replication shall not be taken on record. 46. In case any party is placing reliance on a document, which is not in their power and possession, its details and source shall be mentioned in the list of reliance, which shall also be filed with the pleadings. 47. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the prescribed timelines. 48. List before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 25.08.2026 for completion of service and pleadings. 49. List before the Court on 12.10.2026. TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J MAY 29, 2026/kct CS(COMM) 625/2026 Page 13 of 13 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 02/06/2026 at 20:38:32
Cancel
Update Case