APHC010372342025 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: 1786 OF 2025 Between: 1. DATLA CHAKRAVARDHAN REDDY, S/O D. CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.5/68, ASHOK NAGAR, SAIBABA TEMPLE, NAVALAKULA GARDENS, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 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, S/0 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. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y L SIVA KALPANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Mr.ASHOK RAM KUMAR, LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL ASSISTED BY Mr.SAI SANJAY SURANENI The Court made the following ORDER: (Per NJS,J) The respondents / plaintiffs in COS No.10 of 2025 filed the said suit against the petitioner / defendant alleging infringement of the trademark and to grant judgment and decree for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner / 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 respondents’ / plaintiffs’ trademark “TONIQUE” and other reliefs. 2) Along with the suit the respondents / plaintiffs filed I.A.No.200 of 2025 under Order 26 read with 151 CPC to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to visit the premises / stores of the petitioner / defendant to carry out the things that are mentioned in the prayer sought for in the petition. 3) Learned Judge of the Commercial Court, vide order dated 14.07.2025 appointed an Advocate Commissioner. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner/defendant filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 4) A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.07.2025 directed that the order of appointment of Advocate Commissioner shall be kept in abeyance till the next date of hearing. The said order is extended from time to time. 5) The matter is taken up for consideration along with the connected CRP No.1508 of 2025. 6) Heard Mr. Vamsi Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant and Mr. Ashok Ram Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents / plaintiffs. 7) As noted by this Court in the other CRP No.1508 of 2025, both the learned counsel are keen to address arguments with reference to the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the respondents / plaintiffs states that a detailed counter along with a petition to vacate the interim orders dated 22.07.2025 was filed vide I.A.No.3 of 2025 and further that as there is violation / infringement of the respondents / plaintiffs’ trademark, the Advocate Commissioner was appointed. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to impugn the said appointment by advancing arguments, on being pointed out that in the Interlocutory Application the learned Commercial Court has not passed orders by 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, however with a direction to the learned Commercial Court to dispose of the Interlocutory Application No.200 of 2025 by fixing time limit. 8) At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant submits that as the interim order granted in the present Civil Revision Petition is being extended from time to time, the same may be directed to be continued to safeguard the interest of the petitioner, till appropriate orders are passed by the learned Commercial Court. 9) In the afore mentioned circumstances and as it is felt expedient to dispose of the Civil Revision Petition without going into the merits to enable parties to address their respective arguments before the Commercial Court, this Court is inclined to consider the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner / defendant. 10) Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of providing that the learned Commercial Court shall make an endeavour to dispose of the I.A.No.200 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 petitioner / defendant shall file counter in the said Interlocutory Application, if the same is not filed, within a period of two (02) weeks. The interim orders granted by this Court on 22.07.2025 shall continue till disposal of the I.A.No.200 of 2025. 11) Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. NINALA JAYASURYA,J TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J Date:24.09.2025. Ssv THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1786 OF 2025 Date:24.09.2025 Ssv