Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 11 JUNE 2026

Procedural Irregularity Does Not Vacate Substantive Reliefs

S.S. Rana & Co.
S.S. Rana & Co.
Contributor
S.S. Rana & Co.

S.S. Rana & Co.

Established in 1989, S.S. Rana & Co. is a premier intellectual property and corporate law firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from S.S. Rana & Co.

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.

IndiaIntellectual Property
S.S. Rana & Co. Advocates
S.S. Rana & Co. Advocates
Author LinkedIn connections

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.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from