Allahabad High Court Upholds Temporary Injunction in Trademark Dispute Over "SARKARI RESULT"
Court affirms prior user rights, dismisses appeal challenging the injunction granted to Anugya Gupta against I Think Apps Pvt. Ltd.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has upheld the temporary injunction granted by the Commercial Court, Varanasi, in favor of Anugya Gupta and another against I Think Apps Pvt. Ltd., asserting prior user rights over the trademark "SARKARI RESULT." The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra, dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants, affirming the precedence of prior user rights over registration rights in trademark disputes.
The legal battle stems from a suit filed by the plaintiffs under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking to restrain the defendants from using a trademark identical to "SARKARI RESULT." The plaintiffs claimed usage of the trademark since 2009, supported by registration documentation from the Municipal Corporation dated 2011. The defendants, however, contested this claim, asserting prior use since 2012, which the court found unsupported by sufficient evidence.
The Commercial Court's decision, dated June 12, 2025, directed the defendants to cease using the contested trademark and remove it from all digital platforms. The defendants challenged this injunction, arguing procedural errors regarding the exemption from pre-institution mediation and claiming the plaintiff's acquiescence through past email communications.
The High Court meticulously examined the case, reiterating the principles governing temporary injunctions, emphasizing the necessity of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable harm. It determined that the Commercial Court's decision was neither arbitrary nor capricious, finding adequate evidence of the plaintiff's prior use and continuous presence of the trademark on various platforms since 2009.
Furthermore, the court addressed the procedural aspect concerning Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, affirming the exemption from mediation granted by the lower court. It noted that the requirement for urgent interim relief justified bypassing mandatory mediation, especially in intellectual property disputes where immediate protection of rights is paramount.
The ruling underscores the judiciary's recognition of prior user rights in trademark law, reinforcing the legal framework's role in safeguarding intellectual property against dishonest adoption. The judgment also clarifies that mere delay in instituting a suit does not defeat the claim for injunction if the adoption of the mark by the defendant is deemed dishonest.
This decision sets a precedent for similar trademark disputes, highlighting the importance of prior use in intellectual property litigation, and reinforces the courts' commitment to equitable relief in cases of infringement.
Bottom Line:
Temporary injunction in trademark disputes - Prior user rights are superior to registration rights, and mere delay in instituting a suit does not defeat the claim for injunction if it is established that the adoption of the mark by the defendant was dishonest.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 27, 28, 34, 12-A of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Order XI CPC
Anugya Gupta v. I Think Apps Pvt. Ltd., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2782857
