Delhi High Court - Orders
Lawrence School Sanawar Society vs Tigerfire Llc Usa & Ors on 20 March, 2026
Author: Jyoti Singh
Bench: Jyoti Singh
$~76
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 246/2026
LAWRENCE SCHOOL SANAWAR SOCIETY .....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Sudarshan Kumar Bansal, Mr.
Amit Chanchal Jha and Mr. Arpit Dudeja,
Advocates.
versus
TIGERFIRE LLC USA & ORS. .....Defendants
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
ORDER
% 20.03.2026
I.A. 6539/2026 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
I.A. 6541/2026 (u/S 151 CPC)
3. This application is filed on behalf of the Plaintiff seeking exemption from effecting advance service on the Defendants.
4. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed exempting Plaintiff from effecting advance service on the Defendants.
5. Application stands disposed of.
I.A. 6540/2026 (for pre-institution mediation)
6. This application is filed on behalf of the Plaintiff under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking exemption from Pre-Institution Mediation.
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 1 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
7. Having regard to the facts of the present case wherein urgent relief is prayed for and in light of the judgment of Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi, (2024) 5 SCC 815, as also Division Bench of this Court in Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. RA Perfumery Works Private Ltd., 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3529, exemption is granted to the Plaintiff from Pre-Institution Mediation.
8. Application is allowed and disposed of.
I.A. 6538/2026 (u/O XI Rule 1 (4) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 r/w Section 151 CPC)
9. This application is filed on behalf of the Plaintiff seeking to place on record additional documents within 30 days.
10. Plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly in accordance with provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
11. Application is allowed and disposed of.
CS(COMM) 246/2026
12. Let plaint be registered as a suit.
13. Upon filing of process fee, issue summons to the Defendants No. 1 to 4 at this stage through all permissible modes, returnable before the learned Joint Registrar on 14.04.2026.
14. Summons shall state that the written statements shall be filed by the Defendants No. 1 to 4 within 30 days from the receipt of summons along with affidavit of admission/denial of the documents filed by the Plaintiff.
15. It will be open to the Plaintiff to file replications within 30 days from the date of receipt of written statements along with affidavit of admission/denial of documents filed by the Defendants No. 1 to 4.
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 2 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
16. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same be sought and given the timeline prescribed in Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
17. Learned Joint Registrar will carry out admission/denial of documents and marking of exhibits.
I.A. 6537/2026 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 CPC)
18. This application is filed on behalf of the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC for grant of ex parte ad interim injunction.
19. Issue notice to the Defendants No. 1 to 5 through all permissible modes, returnable before Court on 14.07.2026.
20. For the purpose of this order, the society and the school are collectively referred to as the Plaintiff hereinafter. Case of the Plaintiff as set out in the plaint is that Plaintiff is a registered and autonomous society engaged in services of rendering education through the Plaintiff's school and all activities incidental thereto. Society runs the Lawrence School, Sanawar ('School'), founded in 1847 by Sir Henry Lawrence. Be it politics, bureaucracy, entertainment, defence services, sports, education, corporate or legal fields, alumni of the Plaintiff have carved out a niche in the society with their 'Never Give In Spirit'. Plaintiff has a rich lineage of distinguished alumni, details of which are furnished in paragraph 20 of the plaint. Plaintiff is India's earliest co- educational boarding school and Asia's one of the oldest thriving schools. It has a rich and enduring history, culture and heritage which has flourished over the years and its students, both present and past, have excelled themselves in all walks of life and activities.
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 3 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 Commonly known as Sanawar School, the school is also a member of Indian Public Schools' Conference. The school can boast of distinguished invitees as Chief Guest such as Dr. Rajendra Prasad and Sh. S. Radhakrishnan, former Presidents of India as also former Prime Ministers, Chiefs of the Army Staff, etc. Board of the school includes Secretaries to the Government of India, Officers from Department of School Education and Literacy and other departments. School is affiliated and/or associated with several foreign schools/Universities/Educational Institutions all over the world and conducts many students exchange programmes and conferences.
21. It is stated that sometimes in the year 1914 Plaintiff adopted and started using the word/label mark NEVER GIVE IN in stylized and artistic manner with a distinctive insignia . Ever since then, Plaintiff has been using the mark NEVER GIVE IN as it is an essential part of the trademark, school motto and school song. Additionally, Plaintiff has been using the mark NEVER GIVE IN individually and conjointly on school literatures, publications, uniforms, stationery, vehicles and all other paraphernalia associated with educatonal institutions and services. The mark forms an inseparable part of the school song and express core values, philosophy, mission, guiding principles, rules of conduct and discipline, all geared towards the shared goals like excellence, institutional ethos, community living CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 4 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 and togetherness. The mark enjoys tremendous visibility, recognition and appeal. The registrations obtained by the Plaintiff are as follows:-
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 5 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
22. It is stated that the aforesaid registrations are valid and subsisting and hence, Plaintiff is entitled to exclusively use the trademarks and restrain third parties from infringing them by virtue of provisions of Section 28 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 ('1999 Act'). Plaintiff has been using the mark NEVER GIVE IN in an extremely, arbitrary and fanciful manner and the magnitude, manner and extent of use is such that members of the public associate the mark exclusively with the Plaintiff and its ethos. Plaintiff's trademarks THE LAWRENCE SCHOOL, SANAWAR and SANAWAR are also registered in different classes such as 16 and 41.
23. It is stated that Plaintiff has been using the mark NEVER GIVE IN regularly and continuously for all its activities and over the years it has acquired a secondary meaning. Various leading newspapers and electronic media have from time to time carried news on the different events organized by the Plaintiff. In fact, one of the alumni of the school holding a high position in the Government had in his speech stated that "The motto of Sanawar, NEVER GIVE IN has been my guiding light throughout my life..... The education in Sanawar trained and inspired me to chase my passion and achieve my goal." The mark NEVER GIVE IN is a prominent and valuable trademark of the Plaintiff and with the formidable and enviable reputation attached with the mark comes the protection under the common law rights.
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 6 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
24. It is stated that Defendant No.1 is a corporation under the laws of USA while Defendant No.2 is a limited liability partnership under laws of India wherein Defendants No.3 and 4 are partners. Defendant No.5 is a celebrity and alumni of the Plaintiff. Defendants No.1 to 4 are engaged in business of manufacture and trade of alcoholic beverages and drinks including Vodka and offer services related thereto. In relation to the said goods, Defendants No.1 to 4 have adopted the word mark NEVER GIVE IN and are also using the same as a slogan, tagline and punchline. Artistic labels bear the mark NEVER GIVE IN in a prominent manner as can be seen from the following screenshots:-
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 7 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
25. It is stated that on or about the last week of November, 2025, Plaintiff's attention was drawn by members of the civil society including former students, teachers and parents to internet and social media sites, promoting impugned products using the mark NEVER GIVE IN. Plaintiff also came across trade journals like Ambrosia, Defendants No.1 to 4's own website under the domain www.tigerfirevodka.com, social media platforms like Instagram, news media platforms like News18 India, Bollywood helpline etc. where advertisements, promotions, intended sales, ad campaigns etc. using the mark NEVER GIVE IN have been published by Defendants No.1 to 4. It is evident that Defendants No.1 to 4 are using the mark NEVER GIVE IN in the course of trade in the sense of a trademark within the meaning of Section 2(2)(c) of the 1999 Act.
26. It is stated that to the best of Plaintiff's belief, Defendants No.1 to 4 CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 8 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 have not so far launched the impugned products, however, from the aggressive promotions and usage of literature, writings, campaigns and narratives by public persona etc. in the public domain, it is apparent that they wish to launch the product very shortly. Defendant No.5 is prominently featuring in the promotion campaigns as founder and brand ambassador of the impugned goods and claims to be actively involved in merchandising and promoting the brand. Plaintiff has also discovered upon a search of the e-records of the Registrar of Trade Marks on the official website in Classes 32, 33 and 35 that Defendant No.2 has applied for registration of words TIGERFIRE and NEVER GIVE IN in logo/label format on 'proposed to be used' basis and the applications are pending.
27. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff submits that the trademark NEVER GIVE IN as a word mark as also as a part of the logo/insignia of the Plaintiff bearing the words NEVER GIVE IN are duly registered granting statutory protection to the Plaintiff to protect their infringement. The impugned trademark has subsumed the registered trademark NEVER GIVE IN of the Plaintiff, making it deceptively similar to Plaintiff's registered trademarks. Plaintiff has built a formidable reputation for itself over several decades such that the mere use of the word SANAWAR brings in minds of the people Plaintiff's school immediately. Use of the mark on alcoholic beverages will diminish and disparage the positive image and values as also ethos of the Plaintiff and will dilute the marks. It is only natural that by looking at the impugned trademarks, people will associate the alcoholic beverages as products emanating from the Plaintiff or having some association with it. This will be antithetical to the values, discipline and moral framework represented by the Plaintiff and will weaken and diminish CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 9 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 the enviable goodwill and reputation built by the Plaintiff.
28. It is further urged that Defendants No.1 to 4's usage of the impugned mark will also have a demoralizing and adverse psychological impact on the mental health and personality of students, especially the younger ones and will spread a wrong signal amongst parents, teachers and aspirants, who will subliminally associate Plaintiff's trademark NEVER GIVE IN, the school motto and Plaintiff's ethos with alcohol consumption, which will have a disastrous effect on Plaintiff's image. Even otherwise, the impugned mark is nothing but a dishonest adoption by Defendants No.1 to 4 to take unfair advantage of Plaintiff's rights, goodwill and all rights that flow from registration. It is evident that Defendants No.1 to 4 are acting in bad faith and are intending to pass off their products by misrepresenting to the public that there is an association with the Plaintiff and this will cause irreparable damage to Plaintiff's goodwill and reputation.
29. Having heard learned counsel for the Plaintiff and upon perusal of the documents as well as the rival marks, I am of the view that Plaintiff has made out a prima facie for grant of ex parte ad interim injunction against the Defendants No. 1 to 4. Balance of convenience lies in favour of the Plaintiff and it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the interim injunction, as prayed for, is not granted.
30. Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the trademark NEVER GIVE IN (word) as also devices/composite marks containing the words NEVER GIVE IN as an essential part of the trademarks. The narrative in the plaint and the documents appended thereto prima facie show the immense and formidable goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff in the field of education and related service and activities. Documents on record reflect an intensive CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 10 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 campaign by Defendants No.1 to 4 to launch their alcoholic beverages and going by the plaint, the marks under which they propose to sell their products subsumes the registered trademark of the Plaintiff NEVER GIVE IN, in its entirety and NEVER GIVE IN is not only registered separately as a word mark but is also an essential part of the device marks. With the threshold of reputation that Plaintiff has garnered over decades, it is rightly urged that members of the public and potential consumers of the impugned products will associate the products of Defendants No.1 to 4 with the Plaintiff. Section 28 of the 1999 Act grants statutory protection to the Plaintiff to use its registered mark exclusively and also to restrain third parties from infringing them. Section 29(4) of the 1999 Act provides that a registered trademark is infringed by a person who, not being a registered proprietor or a person using by way of permitted use, uses in the course of trade, a mark which: (a) is identical with or similar to the registered trademark; and (b) is used in relation to goods or services which are not similar to those for which the trademark is registered; and (c) the registered trademark has a reputation in India and use of the mark without due course takes unfair advantage of or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the registered trademark. In my prima facie view, case of the Plaintiff falls within the umbrella of Section 29(4).
31. Plaintiff has a formidable reputation and use of the impugned trademarks by Defendants No.1 to 4, comprising of Plaintiff's mark NEVER GIVE IN, is prima facie with a view to ride on the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiff to pass off their goods by misrepresenting to members of the public and potential consumers that the impugned goods have some association with the Plaintiff and this would cause an irreparable damage to CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 11 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff which it has garnered over several years. Plaintiff is right in asserting that with its established and proven ethos, discipline, standard of education and a distinguished list of alumni, it has carved a niche in the society and association of alcoholic beverages will tarnish its image and dilute its marks. Counsel for Plaintiff has during the course of hearing brought forth that many students, teachers, parents as also alumni are bringing to the notice of the Plaintiff the promotion campaigns run by Defendants No.1 to 4 and are expressing their concern over the association of alcohol with the ethos of education and the image of the school. Attention of the Court is drawn to a comparative table in the plaint bringing forth the usage of the mark NEVER GIVE IN by one of the alumni of the Plaintiff on one hand and Defendant No.5 on the other hand to show the stark contrast of usage and the resultant adverse impact on the credibility of the Plaintiff as follows:-
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 12 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
32. For the sake of ready reference, comparative of the rival trademarks is as follows:-
CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 13 of 15This 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49
33. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, Defendants No.1 to 4 as also their proprietors, partners, principal officers, associates, agents, heirs, successors, distributors, dealers, whole sellers, stockists, and all others acting for and on their behalf jointly and severally, are restrained from advertising, promoting, soliciting, selling or offering for sale, marketing, displaying and/or inviting trade enquiries through any mode whatsoever but not limited to websites, internet, social media platforms, e-market places the impugned products i.e. alcoholic beverages and other distilled spirits, using Plaintiff's registered trademark NEVER GIVE IN as a part of the impugned trademarks/labels/slogans/taglines/punchlines and or any other mark deceptively similar to Plaintiff's marks, amounting to infringement of trademarks and/or passing off.
34. Defendants No.1 to 4 are further directed to take down all promotional content including advertisements and publicity campaigns in any form from their own website as also social media platforms and e-commerce websites wherever the alcoholic beverages have been advertised by them, using Plaintiff's marks NEVER GIVE IN (word and device marks). The needful shall be done within 48 hours from the date of receipt of copy of this order. This will, however, not preclude Defendants No. 1 to 4 from promoting/ selling the alcoholic beverages under their marks, without the use of CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 14 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49 'NEVER GIVE IN'.
35. Plaintiff shall comply with the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC within a period of two weeks from today.
JYOTI SINGH, J MARCH 20, 2026/AK/VP CS(COMM) 246/2026 Page 15 of 15 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 23/03/2026 at 21:57:49