2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 47139
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PANASONIC HOLDINGS CORPORATION VS. ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS.
CS(COMM) 328/2024
##PAGE1## ##PAGE2##
2. The Plaintiff has secured registrations for the trademark
“Moneycontrol’ and its formative versions, including “ ”,
“Moneycontrol+”, “Moneycontrol Plus”, “ ” and
“moneycontrol.com” in classes 09, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42, and 45 inter alia in
relation to financial affairs, digital platforms and applications qua finance,
etc. The details of registrations are mentioned in paragraph no. 7 of the plaint.
3. The present suit concerns the use of Plaintiff’s MONEY CONTROL
marks by Defendants No. 1 to 21, who as per the Plaintiff falsely claim to be
affiliated with the Plaintiff and offering financial investment tips.
4. It is stated that in March 2024, Plaintiff started receiving several
complaints on its grievance redressal email ID and online portals, relating to
unsolicited messages being sent to the public by Defendants Nos. 1 to 21, who
wrongfully represented themselves to be Plaintiff’s employees and asked
unwary consumers to join the WhatsApp group titled “CINV- The Premier
Strategy Group” and/or its group name variations, for stock market trading
tips, insights, insider tips, stock diagnostic analysis etc.
5. It is stated that in these groups, Defendants No. 1 to 21 made false
representations that their ‘CINV’ initiative is co-sponsored by the Plaintiff,
ICICI Bank, Punjab National Bank, and other brokerage firms. To mislead the
consumers, the Defendants in the WhatsApp group offered luxurious gifts,
including providing expected yields of “over 30% profits in a week with
explosive short-term stock”. Purportedly, a professor named Mr. Dev Shah
offered training to the unwary consumer enabling securing a 500% return on
investment. The Defendants made a false claim pertaining to launch a mutual
CS(COMM) 328/2024 Page 2 of 14
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 06/02/2026 at 13:28:48
##PAGE3##fund titled ‘CINV INDIA No.1’ on 23.08.2024 with an aim to raise ‘30
Billion’.
6. It is further stated that it is Defendants Nos. 1 to 18 who approached
unsuspecting members of the public to join the said WhatsApp groups, while
Defendants Nos. 19 and 20 were the group administrators of the WhatsApp
group “CINV- the Premier Strategy Group No. 84”. And, Defendant No. 21
sent a fraudulent message on the WhatsApp group(s) falsely claiming that
CINV is co-sponsored by the Plaintiff.
7. It is stated that aggrieved by the aforesaid illegal and unauthorised acts
of the Defendants, the Plaintiff was constrained to file the captioned suit.
8. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff has submitted that the suit may be
disposed of in terms of the prayer clause 37(i) to (iii) of the plaint as well as in
terms of the directions in paragraph 22 of the order dated 25.04.2025 against
the Defendants 1 to 21.
9. The Plaintiff has filed a note of submissions dated 13.12.2025 and note
on directions dated 19.12.2025 sought qua all the Defendants.
Overview of Proceedings
10. The Court vide ad-interim order dated 25.04.2024, which was
confirmed on 17.09.2025, has already injuncted the Defendant nos. 1 to 21
from using the impugned marks.
11. Vide order dated 25.04.2024, this Court passed several directions
against Defendant No. 22 (WhatsApp LLC), Defendant No. 23 (Vodafone
Idea Limited), Defendant No. 24 (Bharti Airtel Limited), Defendant No. 25
(Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited) and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (which
was arrayed as Defendant No. 25 and subsequently deleted from the array of
parties vide order dated 02.12.2024), inter alia, directing them to temporarily
CS(COMM) 328/2024 Page 3 of 14
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 06/02/2026 at 13:28:48
##PAGE4## ##PAGE5## ##PAGE6## ##PAGE7##23.1. The Plaintiff, while addressing its arguments on 12.12.2025, had
sought a pra