IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT BANSAL, J.
Rahul Mishra and Another - Plaintiffs
Versus
John Doe and Another - Defendants
CS(COMM) 1194/2024
Decided on : 24-12-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemption from mediation granted for urgent relief. (Para 1) |
| 2. exemption from pre-institution mediation in urgent relief cases. (Para 2) |
| 3. plaintiffs granted leave to file additional documents. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. procedural allowance for filing additional documents. (Para 5) |
| 5. plaint duly registered; 'john doe' defendant identified. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 6. plaintiffs claim trademark and copyright infringement. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. defendants accused of selling counterfeit dresses online. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 8. court considers prima facie case for injunction. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 9. interim injunction granted to plaintiffs. (Para 30) |
| 10. directions for compliance and timelines for responses issued. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
ORDER
AMIT BANSAL, J.
I.A. 49743/2024 (u/s 12A of Commercial Courts Act)
1. As the present suit contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1382, exemption from the requirement of pre-institution mediation is granted.
2. The application stands disposed of.
I.A. 49742/2024 (O-XI R-1(4) of the Commercial Courts Act)
3. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiffs seeking leave to file additional documents.
4. The plaintiffs are permitted to file additional documents in accordance with the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
5. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.
CS(COMM) 1194/2024
6. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
7. It is submitted by Mr. J. Sai Deepak, senior counsel appearing for the plaintiffs that as the particulars including the name, contact details and address of defendant no. 1 i.e., the entity operating through www.rahudress.com, is not available nor disclosed on defendant no. 1's website, defendant no. 1 has been impleaded as a ‘JOHN DOE’ defendant.
8. Issue summons.
9. Summons be issued upon filing of process fee to the defendant no. 2 through all modes including e-mail. Summons to the defendant no. 1 shall be issued post the disclosures of details by defendant no. 2.
10. The summons shall state that the written statement(s) shall be filed by the defendants within thirty days from the date of the receipt of summons. Along with the written statement(s), the defendants shall also file affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiffs, without which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.
11. Liberty is given to the plaintiffs to file replication(s), if any, within thirty days from the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication(s) filed by the plaintiffs, affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the defendants be filed by the plaintiffs.
12. The parties shall file all original documents in support of their respective claims along with their respective pleadings. In case parties are placing reliance on a document, which is not in their power and possession, its detail and source shall be mentioned in the list of reliance, which shall also be filed with the pleadings.
13. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
14. List before the Joint Registrar on 25th February, 2025 for completion of service and pleadings.
15. List before the Court on 7th April, 2025.
I.A. 49741/2024 _(O-XXXIX Rule 1 &2 of CPC)
16. The present suit has been filed seeking relief of permanent injunction against the defendant no. 1, seeking to restrain it from infringing the plaintiff no. 1's trademarks and copyright, passing off its goods as that of the plaintiffs' and other ancillary reliefs.
17. The plaintiff no. 1 is a leading Indian Fashion designer based out of Delhi and is engaged in creating exquisitely and luxuriously designed and handcrafted fashion clothes/apparels under his own fashion label ‘RAHUL MISHRA’/
.The plaintiff no. 2 is a company incorporated and registered by
![]() | ||||










The court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against trademark and copyright infringement, emphasizing the plaintiffs' strong prima facie case and the urgency necessitating immediate relief.
The court upheld the grant of a temporary injunction due to established copyright ownership and urgency in preventing further infringement, emphasizing the need for protection against irreparable har....
The judgment establishes the importance of protecting intellectual property rights, territorial jurisdiction in infringement cases, and the enforcement of injunction orders through ICANN regulations.
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.