VAGHASIYA KALPESHBHAI LALJIBHAI PROP OF SHREE GANESH LIVE ALOOPURI AND RASAWALA KHANA vs GANESH RASAVALA KHAMAN LIVE ALOOPURI KHAVSA Advocate - C V CHHETA — 7/2025

Case under Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 134,135,. Status: ISSUES. Next hearing: 01st May 2026.

COMM TMCS - COMMERCIAL TRADEMARK CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJSR010013222025

ISSUES

Next Hearing

01st May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

7/2025

Filing Date

31-01-2025

Registration No

7/2025

Registration Date

31-01-2025

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT

Judge

3-8th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Acts & Sections

TRADE MARKS ACT, 1999 Section 134,135,

Petitioner(s)

VAGHASIYA KALPESHBHAI LALJIBHAI PROP OF SHREE GANESH LIVE ALOOPURI AND RASAWALA KHANA

Adv. N K DEOKAR

Respondent(s)

GANESH RASAVALA KHAMAN LIVE ALOOPURI KHAVSA Advocate - C V CHHETA

Hearing History

Judge: 3-8th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

02-04-2026

ISSUES

07-03-2026

ISSUES

24-02-2026

ISSUES

20-02-2026

ORDER ON INJUCTION APPLICATION

31-01-2026

ORDER ON INJUCTION APPLICATION

Interim Orders

24-02-2026
ORDER

Summary: The Commercial Court of Surat granted a temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiff in a trademark infringement case (TMSC No-7/2025). The court found that the plaintiff established a prima facie case regarding infringement of the registered trademark "SHREE GANESH LIVE ALOOPURI" and that the balance of convenience favored the plaintiff. The defendants are restrained from using, selling, advertising, or dealing in the plaintiff's trademark or any deceptively similar mark until final disposal of the suit, with costs to be borne by the losing party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Commercial Court of Surat granted a temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiff in a trademark infringement case (TMSC No-7/2025). The court found that the plaintiff established a prima facie case regarding infringement of the registered trademark "SHREE GANESH LIVE ALOOPURI" and that the balance of convenience favored the plaintiff. The defendants are restrained from using, selling, advertising, or dealing in the plaintiff's trademark or any deceptively similar mark until final disposal of the suit, with costs to be borne by the losing party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT SURAT All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case