APHC010320682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3549] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1508 OF 2025 Between: 1. TONIQUE BEVERAGES INDIA LLP, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 8-2-293/ 82/A/645. ROAD NO. 36, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA - 500 033, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT CUM AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. G.L.N DAS. 2. ANITH RAJ LAXMAN REDDY,, SON OF RAJ LAXMAN REDDY, RESIDING AT H.NO. 8-2-293/82 A, PLOT NO.762, ROAD NO. 39, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA - 500033, REP. BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. G.L.N.DAS. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. DATLA CHAKRAVARDHAN REDDY, S/o. D. Chandrasekhar Reddy, aged 35 years, Occ Business, R/o. D.No. 5/68, Ashok Nagar,Saibaba Temple, Navalakula Gardens, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SAI SANJAY SURANENI Counsel for the Respondent: 1. Y L SIVA KALPANA REDDY 2 The Court made the following ORDER: (per NJS,J) The petitioners / plaintiffs in COS No.10 of 2025 filed the said suit against the respondent/defendant alleging infringement of the trademark and to grant judgment and decree for permanent injunction restraining the respondent / defendant and its associated companies, subsidiaries etc., or anyone acting for or on its behalf from using the mark “The Tonic” and / or any other mark phonetically and deceptively similar to the petitioner’s / plaintiff’s trademark “TONIQUE” and other reliefs. 2) Along with the suit they filed I.A.No.171 of 2025 under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC to grant an ex-parte ad interim injunction, restraining the respondent / defendant and its associated companies, subsidiaries etc., or anyone acting for or on its behalf from using the mark “The Tonic” and / or any other mark phonetically and deceptively similar to the petitioner’s / plaintiff’s trademark “TONIQUE” and other reliefs. 3) The learned Commercial Court vide docket order dated 24.06.2025 directed urgent notice to the respondent / defendant by 01.07.2025, in the said I.A. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioners / plaintiffs filed the present revision petition on various grounds. 4) A Division Bench of this court by an order dated 02.07.2025 granted ex parte ad interim injunction as prayed for, for a period of four weeks, pending service of notice on the respondent /defendant. The said interim order is being extended from time to time. 3 5) Heard Mr. Ashok Ram Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners/plaintiffs. Also heard Mr. Vamsi Krishna Reddy, learned arguing counsel for the respondent. 6) Referring to the miscellaneous applications, more particularly I.A.No.4 of 2025, learned Senior Counsel sought to advance detailed arguments with reference to the alleged infringement of the petitioners’ trademark “Tonique”. The learned counsel for the respondent / defendant states that a detailed counter along with a petition to vacate the interim orders dated 02.07.2025 was filed vide I.A.No.3 of 2025 and that there is no violation much less infringement of the petitioner’s trademark. 7) Though the learned counsel on both sides were keen to advance arguments in depth, on being pointed out that in the Interlocutory Application the learned Commercial Court has not passed any orders on merits after hearing both sides and it is appropriate for both sides to advance / raise all the contentions before the said Court, the learned counsel fairly accepted the same and consented for disposal of the revision petition with a direction to the learned Commercial Court to dispose of the Interlocutory Application by fixing the time limit. The learned Senior Counsel, however, submits that till disposal of the said Interlocutory Application on merits, the interest of the petitioner may be protected, more particularly in view of the interim order dated 02.07.2025. 8) Considering the submissions made, the revision petition is disposed of, without going into merits, providing that the learned Commercial Court shall 4 make an endeavour to dispose of the I.A.No.171 of 2025 strictly in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to both sides, within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent / defendant shall file counter in the said Interlocutory Application, if the same is not filed, within a period of two (02) weeks. Further pending disposal of the above said Interlocutory Application, the respondent / defendant shall not display or cause to be displayed the mark “The Tonic” on or outside its stores, in any manner. 9) Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. NINALA JAYASURYA,J TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J Date:24.09.2025. Ssv 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1508 OF 2025 Date:24.09.2025 Ssv