Gujarat High Court
Girbala Ayurved Llp vs Hydra8 Hub on 19 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/AO/189/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 189 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 189 of 2025
==========================================================
GIRBALA AYURVED LLP
Versus
HYDRA8 HUB & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
DR. RAJESH H ACHARYA(2233) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 19/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned Advocate Ms. Pooja Acharya for learned Advocate Dr. Rajesh H. Acharya for the appellant argued for some time in the matter. After arguing, under the instructions of her client, she does not invite reasons in the appeal. Nonetheless, learned Advocate Ms. Acharya would request this Court that though there is refusal of ad-interim injunction by the Trial Court in the suit of passing off filed in month of August, 2025, next date of hearing fixed for injunction application is 13th October, 2025. So, learned Advocate Ms. Acharya would Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Fri Sep 19 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 05:30:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/AO/189/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined request this Court that plaintiff may be allowed to request the Trial Court for early hearing of its injunction application, as according to her information and instructions, defendant is duly served in the suit.
2. Further, learned Advocate Ms. Acharya would request this Court that some of the observations made by the Trial Court vide its order dated 29th August, 2025, as regards the registration of Trade Mark by the defendant and using it since long, are factually incorrect observations, inasmuch as the defendant has applied for getting Trade Mark only on 25th April, 2025 and its application is pending at a formality check before the Authority concerned. Whereas, there is nothing on record to show as on date that the defendant was using the mark in question since long.
3. Considering the request made by learned Advocate Ms. Acharya, it appears reasonable and requires acceptance. If the defendant is duly served in the suit, wherein, plaintiff is complaining of infringement of its Trade Mark and of passing of such mark by the defendant, as per settled legal position, an injunction application filed in such type of suit requires to be Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Fri Sep 19 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 05:30:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/AO/189/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined heard and decided as expeditiously as possible.
4. In view of the aforesaid, it is open for the appellant/plaintiff to request the Trial Court to advance the date of hearing of injunction application filed in Trade Mark Suit No.30 of 2025 pending before the Court concerned. As and when, such request will be made, the Trial Court shall advance the date of hearing of the injunction application.
5. After hearing both the sides, the Trial Court shall hear and decide the injunction application as expeditiously as possible, preferably on or before 15th October, 2025.
6. The defendant shall have to submit the reply to the injunction application within the stipulated time so granted by the Trial Court, whereby, the Trial Court shall be able to deliver the judgment/order in the injunction application so filed by the appellant herein in the aforesaid suit.
7. So far as the other aspect about some of the observations made by the Trial Court while refusing prayer of the appellant/plaintiff, whereby, not granted ad-interim injunction in his favour vide its order dated 29th August, 2025 is concerned, it goes without saying that such aspect may be Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Fri Sep 19 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 05:30:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/AO/189/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined agitated before the Trial Court concerned and from the record, if it germane that such would not be the factual situation, the Trial Court can correct its view.
8. It further goes without saying that the injunction application so filed by the appellant/plaintiff in the aforesaid suit, requires to be independently decided by the Trial Court without being influenced by any of its observations so made in the order dated 29th August, 2025 impugned in the present appeal.
9. In view of the aforesaid and reserving the liberty in favour of the appellant/plaintiff to request for early hearing of its injunction application, the present Appeal from Order No.189 of 2025 is disposed of and this Court is not passing any further reasoned order as not invited by the appellant.
10. Civil Application is also disposed of accordingly.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) NRP Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Fri Sep 19 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 20 05:30:53 IST 2025