$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1551/2026 & CM APPL. 45968/2026 DAYANAND ANGLO VEDIC COLLEGE TRUST AND MANAGEMENT SOCIETY & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vivek Srivastava, Advocate versus DR. DEV RAJ DAV SR. SEC. PUBLIC SCHOOL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rohan Taneja and Mr. Raghav Kalra, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 22.07.2026 CM APPL. 45969/2026 (Exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. CM(M) 1551/2026 3. The petitioners assail the order dated 20.05.2026, passed by learned District Judge (Commercial Courts-02), in CS (COMM.) No. 981 of 2025 titled Dayanand Anglo Vedic College & Management Society v. Dr. Dev Raj DAV Sr. Sec. Public School, whereby the learned Trial Court, while hearing arguments on the plaintiffs’/petitioners’ application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, imposed cost of ₹ 50,000/- on the petitioners. Cost is to be deposited with the Central Legal Services Authority, before the next date of hearing i.e., 02.07.2026. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2026 at 11:26:12 4. On 21.04.2026, arguments were heard on the petitioners' application dated 27.08.2025 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC, seeking ad-interim injunction against the respondent to restrain them from infringing the registered trademarks of the petitioners. The learned Trial Court directed the authorized representatives of both parties to appear in person on the next date, for the purpose of clarifying certain communications i.e., an email dated 15.10.2016 and notices dated 19.12.2017 and 01.10.2020. 5. Subsequently, on 20.05.2026, the matter was called before the learned Trial Court, and adjournment was sought twice on behalf of the Petitioners on the ground that the petitioners’ authorized representative was pre- occupied with a meeting of the management committee of the petitioners’ society at that time. A pass over was allowed till 11:15 A.M. by the learned Trial Court, and thereafter, impugned order dated 20.05.2026 imposed costs of ₹ 50,000/- on the Petitioners and listed the matter for 02.07.2026 for further arguments on petitioners’ Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 application and for compliance of order dated 21.04.2026. 6. Thereafter, on 30.06.2026, the petitioners preferred an application under Section 151 CPC seeking waiver of the cost of ₹ 50,000 imposed on the petitioners vide impugned order dated 20.05.2026. 7. On 02.07.2026, the learned Trial Court dismissed petitioners’ application under Section 151 CPC seeking waiver of the cost of ₹ 50,000 stating that no ground for waiver was made out by the petitioners in their application. The learned Trial Court granted the petitioners one more opportunity to deposit the cost of ₹ 50,000, imposed vide impugned order dated 20.05.2026, by the next date of hearing i.e., 23.07.2026. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 20.05.2026, at This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2026 at 11:26:12 the first call, the proxy counsel for the petitioners sought a pass over and diligently informed the learned Trial Court that the authorised representative of the petitioner was currently occupied in a pre-scheduled management committee meeting of the petitioners’ society, and will be present at 11:00 AM. On the second call at 11:00 AM, the proxy counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners sought a short pass over, submitting that the authorised representative of the petitioners was present within the court premises and would appear before the Court within the next ten minutes. The learned Trial Court allowed both pass overs sought by the proxy counsel of the petitioners and fixed the matter at 11:15 AM. 9. The learned counsel further submits that on the third call at 11:15 AM, another request for a pass over was made by the proxy counsel appearing for the petitioner, notwithstanding this assurance that the authorised representative was, in effect, only moments away, the request was denied by the learned Trial Court. It is also submitted that the learned Trial Court, despite intimation and acknowledgment of the 15 minutes delay in the appearance of the authorised representative of the petitioners, erroneously imposed an exorbitant and disproportionate cost of ₹ 50,000. 10. In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and after perusing the records of the present matter, this Court is of the view that, in the interest of justice, the cost of ₹ 50,000/- imposed upon the authorized representative of the petitioners, vide impugned order dated 20.05.2026, should be waived off. 11. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.05.2026 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Courts-02), in CS (COMM.) No. 981 of 2025, hereby stands quashed and set aside. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2026 at 11:26:12 12. In view thereof, the present petition along with pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. AJAY DIGPAUL, J JULY 22, 2026 gs/os This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/07/2026 at 11:26:12