Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6947
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tejas Karia, J
ABHISHEK BACHCHAN – Appellant
Versus
THE BOLLYWOOD TEE SHOP & ORS. – Respondent
CS(COMM) 960/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Ameet Naik, Ms. Madhu Gadodia, Mr. Dhruv Anand, Ms. Udita Patro, Ms. Nimrat Singh, Ms. Deevesha Tudekar, Mr. Dhananjay Khanna & Ms. Aayushi Udani
For the Respondents: Ms. Shruttima Ehersa, Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Ms. Devangini Rai, Ms. Aiswarya Debadarsini, Ms. Diya Viswanath & Ms. Jahanvi Agarwal
Unauthorized use of an individual's persona for commercial purposes constitutes an infringement of personality rights, necessitating judicial intervention to prevent irreparable harm.
Headnote:(A) Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Section 12A - This case addresses an exemption from pre-litigation mediation in urgent matters seeking interim relief as per the precedent established in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1382. (Paras 1, 2, 32-39)
(B) Personality Rights - The case discusses the rights of individuals against the unauthorized use of their persona for commercial gain, emphasizing the necessity of consent. (Paras 33, 26, 34)
(C) Tort Law - It illustrates that the unauthorized commercial exploitation of such rights potentially harms economic interests and personal dignity, validating immediate judicial intervention. (Paras 35, 36, 38)
(D) The Court confirmed the need for an ex-parte injunction against infringing parties and outlined specific rules for the cessation of violations, considering the potential irreparable harm to the Plaintiff's reputation and goodwill. (Paras 39, 40) (E) The Plaintiff established a strong prima facie case with an evident balance of convenience leaning in his favor, affirming that unauthorized commercial exploitation leads to public confusion and damage to reputation. (Paras 28, 38) (F)
Result: An ex-parte injunction was granted against defendants, preserving the Plaintiff’s Personality Rights.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemption application for pre-litigation mediation under commercial courts act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. infringement of personality rights necessitates judicial intervention. (Para 26 , 28 , 33) |
| 3. court grants injunction to protect personality rights. (Para 39 , 40) |
ORDER
% 10.09.2025 I.A. No.22281/2025
(Exemption from pre-institution Mediation)
1. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation Mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act , 2015 (“CC Act”).
2. As the present matter 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.
3. The Application stands disposed of.
I.A. No.22279/2025 (Exemption)
4. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
5. The Application is disposed of.
I.A. No.22280/2025 (Extension of time to file Court Fees)
6. The present Application has been filed by the Plaintiff under Section CPC 149 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 (“ ”), seeking exemption from payment of Court Fees at the time of the filing of the Suit.
7. Considering the submissions made in the present Application, time of two weeks is granted to deposit the Court Fees.
8. The Application stands disposed of.
IA No.22278/2025 (O-XI R-1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908)
9. The present Application has been filed on behalf of the Plaintiff under Order XI Rule 1(4) of the CPC as applicable to Commercial Suits under the CC Act seeking leave to place on record additional documents.
10. The Plaintiff is permitted to file additional documents in accordance with the provisions of the CC Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
11. Accordingly, the Application stands disposed of.
I.A. No.22282/2025 (Extension of time for filing the Certificate under Section 63(4)(c) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023)
12. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff under Section 151 of the CPC seeking extension of time for filing the requisite Certificate under Section 63(4)(c) of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam , 2023.
13. The Plaintiff shall file the relevant Certificate within a period of four weeks.
14. Accordingly, the Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
I.A. No.22283/2025 (for exemption from giving written notice to the government authority)
15. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff under Section 80(2) read with Section 151 of the CPC seeking exemption from serving prior notice under Section 80 of the CPC to Defendant No. 16, i.e., the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and Defendant No. 17, i.e., Department of Telecommunications.
16. For the reasons stated in the Application, the same is allowed.
17. The Application stands disposed of.
CS(COMM) 960/2025
18. Let the Plaint be registered as a Suit.
19. Issue Summons. The learned Counsel for Defendant No. 15 accepts Summons for Defendant No. 15. The learned Counsel for Defendant No. 15 submits that Defendant Nos. 10 to 14 have been impleaded through Defendant No. 15 and their address mentioned in the Plaint is the same as that of Defendant No. 15, which is incorrect. The learned Counsel for Defendant No. 15 further submits that Defendant No. 15 shall provide all the available Basic Subscriber Information of Defendant Nos. 10 to 14, including their addresses, contact numbers and email addresses. Let the same be provided within a period of 7 days. Upon receipt of the said details, the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff shall file an amended Memo of Parties.
20. Let the Summons be served on Defendant Nos. 1 to 9, 16 and 17 through all permissible modes upon filing of the Process Fees. Let Summons be served to Defendant Nos. 10 to 14 at the correct address of Defendant Nos. 10 to 14 through all permissible modes, once the amended Memo of Parties is filed by the Plaintiff.
21. The Summons shall state that the
