Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral)

I.A. 5072/2022

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The Plaintiff No. 1-Sporta Technologies Pvt. Ltd. is a private limited company having its registered office at Mumbai, Maharashtra. Plaintiff No.2-Dream Sports Inc. is a company incorporated in the USA, and Plaintiff No.1 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Plaintiff No.2 (hereinafter, ‘the Plaintiffs’).

3. It is averred that Plaintiffs are a well-known fantasy sports platform launched in 2012, and are the official fantasy sports partner of the International Council of Cricket (ICC), the Campeonato Nacional de Liga de Premiera Division (‘La Liga’), Vivo Indian among others.

4. Additionally, it is averred that Plaintiff No. 2 is the registered proprietor of, inter alia, the trade mark ‘Dream 11’ in a number of classes in India. It also registered the domain www.dream11.com on 17th March 2008.

5. Plaintiff No. 1 is the registered proprietor of the following trade marks in India:

6. Plaintiff No. 2 is the registered proprietor of the following trademarks in India:

7. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that the Defendant is the owner and operator of the website www.sattadream11.com and logowhich appears to have been registered on 1st November 2021. Defendant appears to be offering sports betting services on their website.

8. Vide order dated 1^st April, 2022, this Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs. The order reads as follows:

“19. It is contended by learned counsel for the Plaintiffs that by using the Plaintiffs' trademark, the Defendant is tarnishing the reputation and image of the Plaintiffs in as much as the public is associating the Plaintiffs with the unlawful activities carried out by the Defendant. The use of the trademark is clearly with the objective of riding over the goodwill and reputation that the Plaintiffs enjoy in the concerned field of fantasy sports.

20. Having heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs, this Court is of the view that Plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case for grant of ex parte ad-interim injunction. Balance of convenience lies in favour of the Plaintiffs and they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the injunction, as prayed for, is not granted.

21. Accordingly, Defendant, its directors, representatives and/or other(s) acting for/on its behalf are restrained from using the mark 'SattaDream11" or any deceptively similar variant thereof, as the trademark, tradename, domain name or on social media, email addresses or in any other manner which amounts to infringement of the Plaintiffs' 'Dream11' trademarks or passing off thereto, till the next date of hearing.

22. Godaddy.com LLC is directed to suspend access to the domain name www.sattadream11.com, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order.

23. Plaintiffs shall comply with the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC within one week from today”.

9. Vide order dated 4^th August 2022, this Court observed that Defendant had been served through e-mail, and through speed post. Further, the Defendant was served through electronic mode. In addition, vide order dated 22^nd May 2023, the ld. Joint Registrar observed that the Defendants had not filed their written statement, and consequently the right to file written statement stood closed.

10. Today, despite repeated attempts, the Defendant has not entered appearance despite service. Accordingly, the Defendant is proceeded against ex-parte. The interim injunction passed vide order dated 1st April, 2022 is made absolute during the pendency of the suit.

11. The Defendant’s domain name is www.sattadream11.com which has annexed the entire mark DREAM11, which is the registered trademark of the Plaintiff. A perusal of the website of the Defendant shows that www.sattadream11.com is hosting gaming services which are identical to that of the Plaintiff under an identical/ similar name ‘sattadream11’. The website also shows that the Defendant is providing fantasy cricket ga