In a recent case before the Bombay High Court, although there
appeared to be no infringing sale taking place at the time
of the matter being decided, the court found enough
indication in the past actions of the defendant company to suggest
that infringement was sufficiently likely in the future so as to
grant a temporary injunction. This case came up before the
Commercial Division of the Bombay High Court (Super-Max Ipr
Holdings AG vs Tigaksha Metallics Pvt Ltd., Comm. IP Suit (L)
No.1476 OF 2018, Order dated 26 October, 2018).
Making out a successful case for an interim – or a
temporary – injunction is not always easy for a rights owner.
One has to convince the court that three circumstances exist:
firstly, that a case is made out on the face of it, without delving
into detail; secondly, that the balance of convenience exists in
favour of the rights owner, and thirdly, that irreparable injury
will be caused to the rights owner if the injunction were not
granted.
