Back
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Eureka Forbes Limited – Appellant
Versus
National Internet Exchange of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
I.A. 15742/2022 (under order 39 rule 4 cpc)
2. This is an application filed by Defendant No. 9 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking vacation/modification/variation of the interim order dated 17th May, 2021 and direct Defendant No 2 to unblock Defendant No. 9's website.
3. It is stated by Defendant No. 9 that it is involved in the business of repair of water purifiers and in the course of its business, created a website/domain name, namely, www.aquaeasy.in and adopted the device mark [IMG]. However, pursuant to the Interim Order dated 17th May, 2021, that Defendant No. 9's stated domain name www.aquaeasy.in was blocked.
4. Mr. Rajeev Kumar ld. Counsel appearing for the Defendant No. 9 submits that in view of the interim order, the domain name was blocked by Defendant No. 2 - GoDaddy which ought to be unblocked as there is no injunction qua the mark "AQUAEASY".
5. On the other hand, Mr. Mukund, ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff submits that the Order has been in operation from 17th May, 2021 and in any event, the marks "AQUAGUARD" and "AQUAEASY" are
The word 'AQUA' cannot be monopolized unless there is dishonesty or malafides in adoption.
The court emphasized the importance of strictly abiding by the injunction order and not extending it to any other domain names not covered by the order.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of well-known trademarks from infringement and passing off under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
In trademark infringement cases, courts cannot grant broad injunctions without identifying specific infringing domains; reliefs must target clearly defined trademarks as per Sections 28(1) and 29 of ....
The court reinforced the necessity for swift measures against trademark infringement through domain name registration, emphasizing enforcement against fraudulent websites and the transparency of regi....
Nominative fair use and Section 30 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 were central to the judgment, allowing the use of the 'GeM' mark for informational purposes without creating misrepresentation.
The judgment establishes the importance of protecting intellectual property rights, territorial jurisdiction in infringement cases, and the enforcement of injunction orders through ICANN regulations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
