Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | OA/625/2025 of Mr M Anees Ahmed Sole Proprietor M/s Ambur Star Briyani Vs Ambur Star Briyani |
| CNR | HCMA011320272025 |
| Decision Date | 18-08-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | O.A.625 allowed; O.A.626 closed without prejudice |
| Judgment Author | Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy |
| Court | Madras High Court |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Type of Law | Commercial / Passing off |
| Questions of Law | Whether an interim injunction can be made absolute when the respondent fails to appear and contest after due service |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The court held that once an ad interim injunction is granted and the respondent is duly served but remains unrepresented at subsequent hearings, the injunction may be made absolute without further inquiry. The extension of the interim order, in view of continued non-appearance, justifies converting it into an absolute injunction. A separate application (O.A.626) seeking relief in the same suit can be closed without prejudice to final adjudication on passing off. By taking this course, the court ensures that plaintiffs are not left without protection where defendants choose not to litigate. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The court reaffirmed that in passing-off proceedings, non-appearance by a duly served defendant justifies converting an ad interim injunction into an absolute injunction without requiring fresh evidence.
- An application ancillary to an interim-injunction order (here, O.A.626) can be closed without prejudice where the primary injunction dispute proceeds to final hearing.
- Practitioners may cite this decision to counter delay or non-appearance tactics employed by defendants in trademark and passing-off litigation.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Interim Interdict Granted: On 30.06.2025, the court granted ad interim relief in O.A.625 preventing the respondent from using the trade name pending final disposal.
- Service of Notice: The applicant proved service of notice on 02.07.2025 (affidavit of service dated 17.07.2025).
- First Non-appearance: At the 21.07.2025 hearing, the respondent did not appear; the court extended the interim injunction.
- Continued Non-appearance: On 18.08.2025, the respondent again failed to appear despite prior opportunities.
- Conversion to Absolute Injunction: In light of uncontested injunction and absence of representation, the court made the interim order absolute in O.A.625.
- Closure of Ancillary Application: The related O.A.626 was closed without prejudice, preserving the applicant’s right to prove passing off at final hearing.
Factual Background
Mr M Anees Ahmed, sole proprietor of M/s Ambur Star Briyani, filed a commercial suit (CS(Comm.Div.) No.156 of 2025) seeking to restrain a trader in Vellore from using the mark “Ambur Star Briani.” On 30.06.2025, the Madras High Court granted an ad interim injunction. Notice was effected on the respondent on 02.07.2025, but the respondent failed to appear at subsequent hearings on 21.07.2025 and 18.08.2025. Confronted with continued non-appearance, the court made the injunction absolute in O.A.625 and closed O.A.626 without prejudice to adjudication on passing off.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed