IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Hamdard National Foundation (India) - Appellant
Versus
Amazon India Limited - Respondent
CS (COMM) 607 of 2022 & I.As. 14189 of 2022, 17631 of 2022
Decided On : 11-11-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical background and ownership of 'rooh afza'. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. grievance regarding unauthorized sales on amazon. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. permanent injunction against unauthorized use of trademark. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. decree issuance and disposal of applications. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present suit has been filed by Plaintiff No.1 - Hamdard National Foundation (India) and Plaintiff No.2 - Hamdard Dawakhana also trading as Hamdard Laboratories India against Defendant No.1 - Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Limited and Defendant No.2 - M/s. Golden Leaf, C/o Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Limited. The suit relates to the product and mark of the Plaintiffs `ROOH AFZA'.
3. The case of the Plaintiffs is that Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 are engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling various Unani and Ayurvedic medicines, oils, syrups and non-alcoholic beverages. The Hamdard Group of the Plaintiffs has a history which dates back to over 100 years when well-known Unani practitioner `Hakeem Hafiz Abdul Majeed' set up a Unani clinic under the name `Hamdard Dawakhana'. Over the years, the activities of the Plaintiffs have expanded and they have been involved in research and development.
4. The Plaintiffs own rights in the marks `HAMDARD' and `ROOH AFZA' details of which are mentioned in paragraph no. 11 of the plaint. The mark `ROOH AFZA' was adopted by the Plaintiffs in 1907 and the said product is a market leader in its segment. The mark `ROOH AFZA' has been used by the Plaintiffs for a range of products including non-alcoholic sharbets and beverages, for which Plaintiff No.2 has obtained the assignment on 11th August, 1975 from Plaintiff No.1. The mark ROOH AFZA is registered in India and one of the registrations of the Plaintiffs dates back to 3rd August, 1942. Other trademarks have also been registered by the Plaintiffs for variants of `ROOH AFZA', including the labels and flavour variants etc., The annual sales of the products under the mark `ROOH AFZA' brand are over Rs.200 crores and a substantial amount has also been incurred by the Plaintiffs in the advertisement and promotion of the brand.
5. The grievance of the Plaintiffs in the present case is that Defendant No.1, runs the e-commerce website www.amazon.in. Defendant No.2, which claims to have the contact details - C/o Amazon Sellers Service Pvt. Ltd., 26/1, 10th Floor, Brigade World Trade Center, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Bengaluru-560055 (Karnataka), is a seller on the www.amazon.in platform selling and offering for sale the product `ROOH AFZA' (hereinafter, `impugned products'). The said sellers were `M/s Royal Sales' and `M/s. Good Health Enterprises'. Upon these notices having been issued on 4th September, 2021 and 9th December, 2021, the said listings were removed from www.amazon.in platform. However, recently another listing by one `M/s. Golden Leaf' was found by the Plaintiffs on the website of Defendant No.1 and upon clicking on `Golden Leaf', the contact details were shown as `C/o Amazon Sellers Services Pvt. Ltd'. The Plaintiffs effected purchases of the said product on 6th December, 2021 and found to their utter shock and surprise that the said product was not manufactured by the Plaintiffs. Ld. counsel for the Plaintiffs submits that the said product is manufactured in Pakistan and also does not comply with the legal requirements of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred as "LMA"), the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred as `FSSAI') which governs such products.
6. On 5th September, 2022, when the suit was listed before this Court, Mr. Siddharth Chopra, ld. Counsel appearing for Defendant No.1 had submitted that if the URLs of the infringing listings are furnished to him, the same shall be taken down. On the said date, complete papers were directed to be supplied to ld. Co

E-commerce platforms must disclose complete seller details to prevent consumer deception and protect trademark rights, ensuring compliance with applicable legal standards for product authenticity.
Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, when rectification proceedings are pending, the suit has to be stayed, pending final disposal of such proceedings.
Court emphasized that the assessment of trademark confusion must consider the overall commercial impression, rejecting claims of similarity between 'ROOH AFZA' and 'DIL AFZA'.
Court emphasizes that prior use and goodwill in trade names give rise to rights that protect against passing off and copyright infringement.
Merely riding on strength of his trade mark registration, is indulging in conduct which is not transparent.
A plaintiff seeking an injunction must disclose all material facts; failure to do so may preclude equitable relief even if a prior user claim is made.
The trademark 'AMUL' is recognized as well-known and entitled to broad protection against identical or deceptively similar marks to prevent consumer confusion, irrespective of the goods involved.
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.