Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Injunction Against Trademark Disparagement in Vishnu and Co. v. Smotect Private Limited - 2025-12-12

Protecting the Brand: Delhi High Court Curbs Defamatory Marketing Tactics

In a significant move to protect corporate reputation and intellectual property, the High Court of Delhi has issued an ex parte ad-interim injunction against Smotect Private Limited. Presided over by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, the Court’s order effectively pulls the plug on a series of social media advertisements that allegedly disparaged the well-known VIMAL ELAICHI brand.

The Conflict: A Clash of Claims

The plaintiff, Vishnu and Company Trademarks Pvt. Ltd., known for its widespread footprint in mouth fresheners and related products, approached the Court following the discovery of disparaging content on the Defendants’ Instagram pages. The core of the grievance was an Instagram video where the Defendants featured the VIMAL ELAICHI label while discussing the dangers of tobacco consumption—despite the product being a non-tobacco mouth freshener.

The Plaintiff argued that the Defendants were engaging in "unhealthy competition" to gain cheap publicity by creating a false association between their product and harmful smoking habits, thereby causing irreparable damage to the brand's hard-earned goodwill.

Legal Questions and Procedural Hurdles

The proceedings highlighted the balance courts must strike during emergency intellectual property disputes. The Plaintiff sought urgent relief, citing the potential for ongoing damage caused by the viral nature of social media content.

Notably, the Court granted an exemption from the mandatory pre-litigation mediation process, citing the necessity of immediate protection. Relying on the Supreme Court’s precedent in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi (2024), the High Court acknowledged that the suit for urgent interim relief justified bypassing the typical mediation delay.

The Court’s Reasoning and Order

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora's bench expressed a prima facie view that the Defendants had not only infringed upon the registered trademark and copyright of the VIMAL ELAICHI labels but had also overstepped legal boundaries regarding trade disparagement. The Court found that the Defendants’ actions, involving the misuse of the Plaintiff’s product imagery to suggest health risks, created a misleading narrative.

Key Observations

The judgment underscores the judiciary’s strict stance against the misuse of competitors' intellectual property. Notable highlights from the order include:

• On the nature of the disparagement: "This Court is of the prima facie view that the Defendant No. 1 to 3 have wrongly used the Plaintiff’s product label ‘VIMAL ELAICHI’ in its impugned video and wrongfully called it out to be a gutkha product containing tobacco."
• On the balance of interest: "Balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants. Irreparable injury would be caused to the Plaintiff if an ex parte ad interim injunction as prayed is not granted."
• On the relief granted: "The Defendants and all persons acting for or on their behalf are restrained from using the Plaintiff’s label or any other label identical or deceptively similar thereto, in any manner whatsoever."

Implications for Future Cases

The Court has directed the Defendants to take down the infringing videos within 72 hours of receiving the order, reinforcing the legal consequences of using social media as a tool for corporate defamation. By granting this injunction, the Delhi High Court has sent a clear signal that intellectual property protections extend well beyond simple logo theft; they encompass the preservation of a brand's integrity against targeted misinformation campaigns. The matter is now set to be heard on January 30, 2026, where the presence of the Defendants will be critical to the ongoing litigation.