SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46768

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
GET OUT SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. VS. MR RAJEEV MALHOTRA & ORS.
CS(COMM) 895/2024



##PAGE1##

$~51

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CS(COMM) 895/2024

VALSAD DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS

UNION LTD .....Plaintiff

Through: Mr. Abhishek Singh, Mr. J. Amal

Anand, Mr. Elvin Joshy, Ms. Shivani

Kalra, Mr. K.V. Vibu Prasad and Mr.

Ayush Soni, Advs.

versus

M TECK FOODS & ANR. .....Defendants

Through: None

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 23.12.2025

1. This is a suit filed for permanent and mandatory injunction, trademark

and copyright infringement, passing off, damages, and other ancillary

reliefs.

2. The Plaintiff- a district Co-operative Milk Producers’ Union, is the

registered proprietor of the trademark /VASUDHARA

[‘Plaintiff’s mark and trade dress’] and has been using the same since 1988.

This is also the trade dress of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff is engaged in the

business of marketing and selling ghee under the said mark and trade dress.

CS(COMM) 895/2024 Page 1 of 8

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:27:37

##PAGE2##

3. The Plaintiff has registration for the said device mark

in Class 29 bearing TM No. 1249641, application dated

14.11.2003, with user claim since 31.10.2003. Details of Plaintiff’s various

trademark registrations for its mark VASUDHARA have been set out in

paragraph ‘41’ of the plaint.

4. The Plaintiff’s turnover for the year 2023-2024 was approximately

Rs. 88.38 crores.

Knowledge about Defendant No.1’s infringement

5. In June 2024, the Plaintiff learnt that Defendant No.1 had been using

VASTUDHARA/ [‘impugned mark and trade dress’] for

its pure ghee product, with a deceptively similar mark and trade dress to

Plaintiff’s registered mark and trade dress, which was being sold on the

platform of Defendant No.2/Amazon.

6. Defendant No.1 has also applied for the registration of the wordmark

‘VASTUDHARA’ bearing TM no. 5885639 in Class 29, application dated

10.04.2023, on a proposed-to-be-used basis; however, the application is

under objection.

7. It is stated that the products sold by the Defendant No. 1 under the

impugned mark and trade dress are adulterated, substandard and non-

CS(COMM) 895/2024 Page 2 of 8

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 22:27:37

##PAGE3##

compliant with FSSAI, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India. standards. Testing by NDDB, National Dairy Development Board CALF3 Ltd. [a

NABL, National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories-accredited FSSAI-recognized laboratory], revealed non-compliance

with the prescribed fatty acid profile and 13-sitosterol parameters, with the

presence of β-sitosterol indicating adulteration with vegetable fats.

Accordingly, the product cannot be classified as ghee or pure ghee and is in

violation of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

8. It is stated that Defendant No.1 is intentionally and fraudulently

deceiving consumers and the public at large, who purchase its products

under the bona fide belief that they originate from the Plaintiff’s

VASUDHARA brand, but are instead supplied with cheap, adulterated and

substandard products, thereby affecting the reputation and goodwill of the

Plaintiff. It also jeopardises the health and safety of consumers and the

public at large.

9. Despite the issuance of a cease-and-desist notice dated 24.06.2024,

Defendant No.1 continued its infringing activities. Aggrieved by the same,

the Plaintiff has filed the present suit.

Submissions on behalf of the Plaintiff

10. Mr. Abhishek Singh, learned counsel for the Plaintiff, states that the

Plaintiff is only pressing for reliefs of permanent injunction against

Defendant No. 1 as prayed for at paragraph 79 (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) of

the plaint.

10.1. He states that the Plaintiff is not pressing for

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top