Saurashtra Cement Ltd, Throuigh power of Attorney Yogeshkumar Bhanushankar Joshi vs Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries Partnership Firm Advocate - N B SHAH From Ahmedabad — 1/2023

Case under Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 26,27,28,28,134,135. Status: Hearing On Injunction Application. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.

Hearing On Injunction Application Next hearing 20-Jun-2026 this date has passed

TMSUIT - TRADE MARK SUIT

CNR: GJPB010004922023

Filing Number

1/2023

Filing Date

08-Jun-2023

Registration No

1/2023

Registration Date

08-Jun-2023

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT PORBANDAR

Judge

2-Addl.district & Sessions Judge

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 26,27,28,28,134,135

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Saurashtra Cement Ltd, Throuigh power of Attorney Yogeshkumar Bhanushankar Joshi

    Adv. H D PUROHIT and JAYAVIN K JOSHI, J K JOSHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries Partnership Firm Advocate - N B SHAH From Ahmedabad

  2. 2.Jitendra Govindbhai Vaish Partner of Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries Partnership Firm

    Adv. N B SHAH From Ahmedabad

  3. 3.Nishitbhai Mahendrabhai Manek Patner of Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries Partnership Firm

    Adv. N B SHAH From Ahmedabad

  4. 4.Sureshbhai Vallabhabhai Bhuva Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries Partnership Firm

    Adv. N B SHAH From Ahmedabad

Case History

  1. 20-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 27-Apr-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  5. 01-Apr-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  7. 07-Feb-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  8. 09-Jan-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: Trade Mark Suit No. 1/2023 Outcome: Defendants' application to reject the plaint was rejected. The court allowed Saurashtra Cement Ltd's trademark infringement suit against Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries to proceed to trial. Key Holdings: The court held that the Commercial Courts Act requirements (pre-institution mediation and specified value provisions) do not apply to trademark suits governed by the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Defenses regarding limitation, knowledge of the mark since 2005, and acquiescence require factual evidence and cannot be decided at the plaint rejection stage. The plaintiff had demonstrated proper court fee payment and valid authorization through Power of Attorney. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  9. 09-Jan-2026

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  10. 12-Dec-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  11. 21-Nov-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  12. 01-Nov-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  13. 10-Oct-2025

    OrderView PDF

  14. 10-Oct-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  15. 12-Sep-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  16. 22-Aug-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  17. 02-Aug-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  18. 07-Jul-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  19. 16-Jun-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  20. 16-Apr-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  21. 08-Mar-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  22. 18-Feb-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  23. 27-Jan-2025

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  24. 14-Dec-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  25. 14-Oct-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  26. 09-Aug-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  27. 14-Jun-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  28. 09-May-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  29. 05-Apr-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  30. 18-Mar-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  31. 16-Feb-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  32. 20-Jan-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  33. 21-Dec-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  34. 29-Nov-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  35. 23-Oct-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  36. 18-Sep-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  37. 08-Aug-2023

    Reply To Counter Claim

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  38. 13-Jul-2023

    Written Statement/Reply

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  39. 08-Jun-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  40. 08-Jun-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Trade Mark Suit No. 1/2023 Outcome: Defendants' application to reject the plaint was rejected. The court allowed Saurashtra Cement Ltd's trademark infringement suit against Parth Cement and Chemicals Industries to proceed to trial. Key Holdings: The court held that the Commercial Courts Act requirements (pre-institution mediation and specified value provisions) do not apply to trademark suits governed by the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Defenses regarding limitation, knowledge of the mark since 2005, and acquiescence require factual evidence and cannot be decided at the plaint rejection stage. The plaintiff had demonstrated proper court fee payment and valid authorization through Power of Attorney. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case