Injunction in AZ Tech (India) v Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. Stayed

Three days ago, I wrote a post about the order of temporary injunction in the case of AZ Tech (India) & Anr. v Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. & Anr., where the handset giant, Intex Technologies was injuncted from using the “Aqua” trademark. This injunction was granted primarily on the grounds that AZ Tech (India) was the prior user of the mark and the use of the same trademark by Intex Technologies would cause the likelihood of confusion amongst customers. This was a welcome change from regular injunction orders in cases of passing off, where larger companies are able to prima facie prove passing off against smaller players because of their goodwill and enviable reputation.

However, a kind reader brought to my attention that the orders of injunction have already been stayed.

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, on January 6th this year, seemingly passed a stay order to the judgement of the single bench of the Delhi High Court. Read the order here. All this stay order tells us is that the counsels on both sides wish for this matter to be resolved expeditiously. “In the meanwhile”, states the court, “there shall be stay of the operation of the impugned judgement”. What is most surprising is that this order neither states the numbers of the original suits, nor does it give any identification of the judgement it seeks to stay. The High Court website does not reflect this development in a search for the original suit either. One can merely conjecture that the stay order pertains to the injunction as Intex Technologies is the Appellant here, while AZ Tech (India) is the respondent.

We cannot be certain if the court erred here, or if the uploading of such orders was faulty, as it often is. But it is important for us to strive for a better, more transparent judicial system.

Further, notably, the court does not state any reasons for granting this stay order, apart from mentioning that the parties wish for the matter to be resolved expeditiously. Presumably, a full trial in the near future is on the cards, and the court wishes to effect a final judgement instead of a temporary injunction.

We wish to thank Mr. Anon for bringing this development to our notice.

Spicy IP shall keep you updated on this issue as soon as more details come to light.

Image from here

Vasundhara Majithia

Vasundhara Majithia is a fifth year student at National Law University, Jodhpur and a Senior Content Editor at the Journal of Intellectual Property Studies (JIPS). Intellectual property was introduced to her in her third year and she hasn’t quite gotten over it since. Her interests include an eclectic mix of Intellectual Property, Trade laws, Constitutional law, and commercial laws. When not frantically blogging, she can be found nose deep in fiction, researching serial killers, or cooking to escape hostel food.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.