[2026:RJ-JP:26395] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No.171/2026 URN: CMAP / 223U / 2026 In S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.374/2019 M/s Rajani Products, G-300, Indraprasth Industrial Area, Kota Through Partner Kamal Rajani, S/o Shri Shree Chand, Aged About 50 Years, R/o G-300, Indraprasth Industrial Area, Kota (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus M/s Swastik Oils Industries, F-5-8, Industrial Area, Newai District Tonk (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor/ Director/ Manager/ Authorized Signatory/ Partner. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : None present JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 13/07/2026 1. Matter comes on instant misc. application, seeking extension of time fixed by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 while deciding SB Civil Misc. Appeal No.374/2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while deciding the aforesaid appeal, this Court passed a specific order directing the Trial Court to finally decide the pending suit expeditiously within a period one year. Counsel submits that the said period has expired, still the matter is at the stage of recording the evidence of the plaintiff, therefore, appropriate [2026:RJ-JP:26395] (2 of 3) [CMAP-171/2026] directions be issued to the Trial Court to decide the pending suit expeditiously within a fixed time frame. 3. None has put appearance on behalf of the respondent. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the applicant and looking to the fact that while deciding S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.354/2019, this Court passed an order on 28.04.2025 and in para No.17 of the aforesaid order it has been observed and directed the Trial Court as under: “17. Considering the arguments of the rival sides and looking to the fact that the matter pertains to the trade marks and is lying pending for its adjudication for last more than 16 years and the case has been marked as “old targeted case” and looking to the law laid down by this Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vardhman Rice (Supra) wherein it has been held that the matter relating to Trade Mark, copy rights, should be finally decided expeditiously by the trial Court instead of merely granting or refusing to grant injunction, this Court deems it just and proper to issue a direction to the Trial Court to decide the pending suit expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of one year.” 6. Perusal of the aforesaid directions clearly indicates that a timeline was fixed for the Trial Court for making all possible endeavours to decide the pending suit expeditiously, but the suit could not be finally decided on account of certain applications submitted by the other side. It has been brought into the notice of this Court that the application submitted by the other side was allowed by the Trial Court vide order dated 31.05.2025 and the matter was adjourned for three months. Thereafter, one more application was submitted and the same was also allowed vide [2026:RJ-JP:26395] (3 of 3) [CMAP-171/2026] order dated 26.11.2025. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the order dated 31.05.2025, approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15838/2025 and the respondent also approached this Court by way of filing SB Civil Writ Petition No.1111/2026. The aforesaid writ petition submitted by the petitioner was allowed and the order dated 31.05.2026 was quashed and set-aside by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.03.2026. 7. More than three months have passed thereafter, still the matter is at the stage of recording the evidence of the plaintiff. 8. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to extend the time fixed by this Court for a further period of nine months. 9. With the aforesaid observations, the instant civil misc. application stands disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/93