Delhi High Court
LPA/795/2026 of AMNEX INFOTECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs GOOGLE LLC & ANR. on 6 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010469572026 + LPA 795/2026 AMNEX INFOTECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Appellant Through: Mr. Himanshu Satija, Mr. Raheel Patel, Ms. Sujal Gupta & Mr. Suyash Shrivastava, Advs. versus GOOGLE LLC & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Prithvi
$~47
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010469572026
+
LPA 795/2026
AMNEX INFOTECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
.....Appellant
Through:
Mr. Himanshu Satija, Mr. Raheel
Patel, Ms. Sujal Gupta & Mr. Suyash
Shrivastava, Advs.
versus
GOOGLE LLC & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Prithvi Singh, Ms. Urvi Nama &
Ms. Harshali Chauhan, Advs. for R-1.
Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC with Mr.
Arnav Mittal, Adv. for R-2/Registrar
of Trademarks.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA SAHAY SAXENA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
06.10.2026
CM APPL. 67592/2026(condonation of delay of 89 days in filing appeal) CM APPL. 67593/2026(condonation of delay of 15 days in re-filing appeal)
1. Heard.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that she has no objection if the delay in filing and re-filing the appeal is condoned.
3. For the reasons stated and averments made in both the applications, this Court is of the opinion that sufficient cause has been stated for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay of 89 days in filing and 15 days in re-filing the present appeal is hereby condoned.
4. The applications stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. CM APPL.69390/2026 (to amend memo of parties on behalf of the appellant)
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has no objection to the present application being allowed.
6. Having considered the averments made in the application and for the reasons stated therein, the same is allowed.
7. The application stands disposed of.
8. Consequently, the amended memo of parties is taken on record. LPA 795/2026 & CM APPLs.67588/2026, 67589/2026, 67590/2026, 67591/2026
9. Present appeal has been filed under Clause X of the Letter Patent assailing the impugned order dated 07.04.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.O.(COMM.IPD-TM) No.57/2026.
10. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the impugned order dated 07.04.2026 is an ex-parte order passed by the learned Single Judge without giving any opportunity of hearing, as a result of which they could not place their objections on record. He submits that the matter may be remanded to the learned Single Judge for adjudication without going into the merits, with liberty to the appellant to raise all their submissions before the learned Single Judge.
11. Learned counsel for the respondents who appears on advance notice has no objection only to the said extent.
12. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, the appeal is disposed of by permitting the appellant to raise all their grievances before the learned Single Judge who shall after hearing the parties pass a fresh order on merits in accordance with law.
13. The appeal stands disposed of. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J
NISHA SAHAY SAXENA, J OCTOBER 6, 2026 ab/jd