We are pleased to announce that S. S. Rana & Co. successfully represented the Respondent, R. H. Agro Overseas, before the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in a trademark appeal raising a short yet significant question of procedural law.
The Situation
The Trial Court, while granting an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the Defendant from using the suit trademark, simultaneously and erroneously disposed of the injunction application, creating an unusual procedural predicament.
The Argument
While conceding the clerical lapse, S. S. Rana & Co. argued that the defect was curable under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and that a procedural irregularity of this nature should not deprive a Plaintiff of reliefs granted on the merits of the case.
The Outcome
The Hon’ble Division Bench invoked its inherent powers to modify the “error apparent on record”, restored the injunction application for further consideration, and, critically, sustained the ex-parte ad-interim injunction in the meantime.
The Court further observed that the error in the Trial Court’s order was avoidable, and that Trial Courts ought to exercise caution in proof-reading orders before releasing them.
Key Takeaway
A procedural irregularity does not automatically vacate substantive reliefs already granted. Courts possess the inherent power to correct errors apparent on record, and the answer is not always vacation.