Delhi High Court Restrains Unauthorized Use of 'Delhi Public School' and 'DPS' Marks in Landmark Infringement Ruling

In a swift ex-parte decision, the Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction to the Delhi Public School Society, barring a Rajasthan-based school from using marks deceptively similar to its well-known 'Delhi Public School' and 'DPS' trademarks. The order, issued by Hon'ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora on December 8, 2025, underscores the protection of intellectual property in the education sector amid rising instances of brand imitation.

Case Background

The suit, titled CS(COMM) 1247/2025 , was filed by the Delhi Public School Society—a registered society established in 1949 and operating over 200 schools worldwide under the 'DPS' banner—against Delhi Public School International Bhiwadi (Defendant No. 1), its managing society (Defendant No. 2), and domain registrar GoDaddy Inc. (Defendant No. 3). The plaintiff sought relief under Sections 135(2) of the Trademarks Act, 1999, and 55(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957, read with provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

The core allegation: Defendants 1 and 2 are operating a school in Bhiwadi, Rajasthan, using the name 'Delhi Public School International', the abbreviation 'DPS', and a logo strikingly similar to the plaintiff's iconic shield and leaf designs. These include essential elements like a torch (mashaal), crest/shield, creepers, and the motto 'Service Before Self'. The plaintiff discovered the infringement on October 24, 2025, through reports and a site visit, revealing the school's false claims of affiliation with the DPS network and use of a mimicking domain (https://www.dpsibhiwadi.in/) and email (dpsinternationalbhiwadi@gmail.com).

The plaintiff's marks, including 'Delhi Public School', 'DPS', and associated logos, are registered across multiple classes (e.g., Class 16 and 41) with user claims dating back to 1948 and 1996. They were declared well-known marks by the Trademark Registry on July 3, 2020, and enjoy copyright protection (registrations A-95324/2012 and A-111554/2014).

Plaintiff's Arguments

Represented by Senior Advocate Puneet Mittal, the plaintiff argued that the defendants' marks are "virtually identical" to its well-established ones, with the addition of 'International' merely intended to evoke association with schools like DPS International Saket. The counsel highlighted:

• Deceptive Similarity : A side-by-side comparison showed the defendants' logo combining all key features of the plaintiff's shield (hand with torch, motto, 'Delhi Public School' text) and leaf designs, with only minor cosmetic changes that fail to create distinctiveness.
• Dishonest Adoption : Defendant No. 1's director, Ms. Dipti Ghosh, had twice applied (in 2015 and 2019) for the impugned logo in Class 41, but both were refused by the Trademark Registry due to conflicts with the plaintiff's marks. This, coupled with the school's promotion of affiliations, indicated bad faith.
• Triple Identity and Harm : The marks target identical services (education), trade channels (school admissions), and consumers (parents and students). This could confuse the public, leading to dilution of the plaintiff's goodwill and irreparable injury, especially as defendants were soliciting admissions for 2026-2027.

The plaintiff emphasized its prior use since 1949, global reputation, and the statutory right to exclusive use, arguing no justifiable reason for the defendants' imitation.

Court's Analysis and Findings

Despite issuing notice on November 21, 2025, and confirming service via email, speed post, and dasti (affidavit dated November 28, 2025), no representatives appeared for the defendants. Justice Arora noted this non-appearance as inexplicable, presuming no viable defense.

The court conducted a prima facie review, observing:

> "Upon bare perusal of the comparison of the marks, it is prima facie evident that the impugned marks ‘Delhi Public School International’, ‘DPS’ and [logo] are deceptively identical to the Plaintiff’s well-known marks."

Key reasoning included: - Reputation and Goodwill : The plaintiff's 200+ schools and 1949 origins establish unchallenged recognition, binding the defendants' director to knowledge of these marks. - Bad Faith Evidence : Refusal of trademark applications reinforced dishonest intent. - Likelihood of Confusion : In a case of "triple identity" (similar marks, identical services, overlapping channels/consumers), an average observer with "imperfect recollection" would associate the defendants' school with the plaintiff. - No Local Commissioner Needed : The court rejected the plaintiff's separate application (I.A. 29035/2025) under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for site inspection, deeming it unnecessary at this stage.

Applying principles from trademark law, the court found a strong prima facie case, balance of convenience in the plaintiff's favor, and risk of irreparable harm without intervention.

Final Decision and Implications

The court granted the ex-parte ad interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC, restraining Defendants 1 and 2 from using, advertising, or permitting the use of 'Delhi Public School International', 'DPS', the impugned logo, or any similar marks in trademarks, trade names, domains, emails, or otherwise. Defendant No. 3 (GoDaddy) was directed to lock and suspend the domain https://www.dpsibhiwadi.in/.

Compliance with Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC is required within one week, with an affidavit of service in two weeks. The matter is listed before the Joint Registrar on January 21, 2026, and the court on May 18, 2026.

This ruling reinforces protections for well-known marks in education, signaling zero tolerance for passing off that exploits established brands. It may deter similar infringements while highlighting the Delhi High Court's role in swiftly addressing IP disputes, potentially influencing future cases on deceptive similarity in service marks.