IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Navin Chawla, J.
Dhani Loans and Services Limited - Appellant
Versus
www.dhanifinance.com - Respondent
CS(COMM) 675 of 2019 & I.A. 17453 of 2019
Decided On : 12-10-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs seek injunction regarding trademarks. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 14) |
| 2. plaintiffs' financial and trademark background. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. use of plaintiffs' trademarks by defendant. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 15) |
| 4. court's reasoning on trademark infringement. (Para 18 , 24 , 25) |
| 5. court's summary judgment rationale. (Para 27 , 36) |
| 6. final orders and relief granted. (Para 39 , 40) |
JUDGMENT
1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs inter-alia seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant no. 1, its family members, partners/promoters, directors, servants, agents, franchisees or any one acting for and on their behalf in any manner using the impugned trade mark/logo
or the domain name www.dhanifinance.com or any identical or deceptively similar trade mark/name/logo or domain name either as a trade mark, trading style, logo, domain name or in any other manner which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' trade marks `DHANI' or the `POTLI'
device stand-alone or in any combination thereof and/or domain name www.indiabullsdhani.com, in relation to any services especially for financial and transaction services and assistance thereto.
2. The plaintiffs further prayed for a direction to the defendant nos. 2 and 3 to provide all the details of the registrant of the domain name of the defendant no. 1; including the name, address, contact number, e-mail ID, including its whereabouts and other such relevant details disclosing the identity of the registrant of the domain name of the defendant no. 1, along with the Internet Protocol (in short, `IP') address of the domain name of the defendant no.1.
3. As far as the defendant nos.2 and 3 are concerned, vide order of this Court dated 22.09.2022, while passing certain directions, with the consent of the plaintiffs and the defendant nos. 2 and 3, they were deleted from the array of parties.
4. As far as the defendant no. 1 is concerned, it was proceeded ex-parte vide order of this Court dated 22.08.2022. The defendant no. 1, despite service, had neither entered appearance in the suit nor filed its written statement.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
5. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs are a part of the Indiabulls Group, which has been providing financial services in India as well as internationally since the year 1994. The Indiabulls Group, as on 31.03.2018, had a combined revenue of over Rs.22,114.9 Crore (Rupees Twenty-Two Thousand One Hundred Fourteen and Nine Crore only) and PAT of Rs.6,072.2 Crore (Rupees Six Thousand Seventy-Two and Two Crore only). The plaintiff no. 1 alone had a combined revenue of over Rs.1650 Crore (Rupees One Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Crore only) and PAT of over Rs.400 Crore (Rupees Four Hundred Crore only) as on 31.03.2019.
6. The plaintiffs assert that the plaintiff no. 1 is a non-banking finance company and is a wholly owned subsidiary of the plaintiff no. 2. The plaintiff no. 1 is inter-alia engaged in the business of providing personal loans, business loans and various other financial facilities through its array of products.
7. It is further asserted that the plaintiff no. 2 is one of India's leading capital market companies providing securities and derivative brokering services. The plaintiff no. 2 was the first company to be assigned a BQ-1 Grading by the CRISIL, which is the highest broker quality grading. Brickworks Ratings has also assigned a strong credit rating of BWR A+ and BWR A1+ for the plaintiff no.2's fund and non-fund-based facilities.
8. The plaintiffs further assert that in September 2017, the plaintiffs launched its services for `IndiabullsDhani' and along with the domain name www.indiabullsdhani.com, a mobile and web-based loan application developed to offer personal financing solutions. The mobile application, `Indiabullsdhani' was ranked as among the top three downloaded mobile applications in the financial services sector, having more than 11.5 mil



![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() |





















The court affirmed the plaintiffs' rights against infringement and passing off, validating their trademarks through established goodwill and allowing for summary judgment due to the defendant's non-a....
The court established that the unauthorized use of identical trademarks constitutes infringement and passing off, justifying a permanent injunction and awarding damages to the rightful trademark owne....
Trademark infringement occurs when a defendant uses an identical or deceptively similar mark causing confusion to consumers. The plaintiff establishes exclusive rights through registration and extens....
The court affirmed the rights of trademark owners against unauthorized use, ruling that failure to defend constitutes grounds for summary judgment.
The court held that a well-known trademark, like `TATA`, is entitled to protection against any unauthorized use that may deceive the public, confirming jurisdiction over foreign entities where online....
Trademark infringement and passing off can be established based on the use of deceptively similar marks and failure to comply with interim injunction orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the finding of trademark infringement and passing off, leading to the award of compensatory and nominal damages to the Plaintiff.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.