The subject matter of this analysis revolves around a Letters Patent Appeal filed against a judgment dated 17 May 2023. In that judgment, a learned Single Judge allowed the petition filed by respondent no. 1 under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The core issue in this case was the similarity between the registered trademark "INSAID" owned by the appellant and the trademark "INSEAD" held by respondent no. 1.

The Case and the Delay:
One of the pivotal grounds on which this order was challenged pertains to the inordinate delay in pronouncing a judgment on an interim application. This delay raised questions about the principles of justice and expeditious disposal of cases in the legal system.

The rectification petition had been initiated back in 2021. Orders for ad interim relief were reserved on 10 September 2021, but after a considerable lapse of time, the matter was reopened. This delay in adjudicating the interim relief application caused frustration for the parties involved. The parties urged the court to intervene and issue appropriate directions for the petition to be expeditiously considered by the learned Single Judge.

Judicial Intervention and Its Implications:
Considering the compelling circumstances surrounding the delay, the Hon'ble Division Bench allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment dated 17 May 2023. They made a significant decision to remit the matter to the learned Single Judge for a fresh consideration and emphasized the need for expeditious resolution.

This judicial intervention sends a strong message about the importance of timely adjudication in legal proceedings. Inordinate delays in pronouncing judgments, especially on interim applications, can have adverse consequences. It not only prolongs the litigation process but also hampers the rights and interests of parties involved.

The Role of Courts in Ensuring Timely Justice:
This case highlights the role of the judiciary in ensuring that justice is not only done but is also seen to be done promptly. Delay in the legal process can result in severe hardships for the litigants, as they often need quick resolutions to protect their rights or businesses. By remitting the matter for expeditious disposal, the Division Bench has underlined the importance of judicial efficiency.

The Concluding Note:
In conclusion, the case concerning the inordinate delay in pronouncing judgment on an interim application underscores the significance of timely justice in the legal system. It exemplifies the need for courts to actively address delays in the adjudication process and uphold the principles of fairness and efficiency.

The Case Law Discussed:
Case Title: Fullstack Education Pvt.Ltd. Vs Institut Europeen D Administration Des
Date of Judgement/Order:30/10/2023
Case No. LPA 536/2023
Neutral Citation No: N A
Name of Hon'ble Court:High Court of Delhi
Name of Hon'ble Judge: Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja, H.J.

Disclaimer:
Information and discussion contained herein is being shared in the public Interest. The same should not be treated as substitute for expert advice as it is subject to my subjectivity and may contain human errors in perception, interpretation and presentation of the fact and issue involved herein.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor - Patent and Trademark Attorney
Email: [email protected], Ph no: 9990389539