$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 401/2025&I.A. 10959/2025 I.A. 13700/2025 I.A.

13701/2025 I.A. 23300/2025 I.A. 23301/2025 I.A. 23302/2025 I.A. 25623/2025 I.A. 25644/2025 I.A. 26783/2025 I.A. 26786/2025 I.A.

30945/2025 I.A. 30977/2025 WORLD TRADE CENTERS ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Arun Sri Kumar and Ms.

IshitaJain, Advocates versus WTC NOIDA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PVT. LTD. & ORS.

.....Defendants Through: Mr. Kiratraj Sadana, Advocatefor D-1 & 5.

Ms. Bahuli Sharma, Ms. Ridhi Arora,Ms. Susan Maria Mathew and Ms.Akshata, Advocates for D-4 CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 10.12.2025 I.A. 23302/2025(seeking appointment of Local Commissioner)

1. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Order XXVI Rules 9 and 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, [‘CPC’], seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner to inter alia investigate the extent of the defendants’ breach of the interim injunctions granted by this Court vide order dated 02.05.2025 and take necessary actions for seizure of infringing signages, etc. 2. This order is being passed in continuation of the order dated

18.09.2025. Relevant portion of the order reads as under: -

“I.A. 23302/2025 (for appointment of Local Commissioner)

6. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff under Order XXVI Rules 9 and 16 of CPC, 1908, seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner to inter alia investigate the extent of the Defendants’

breach of the interim injunction granted vide order dated 02.05.2025.

7. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that the Plaintiff is seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner to visit the four (4) sites enlisted in Schedule ‘1’, as the Plaintiff’s trademark continues to be displayed on the signages at the said sites.

8. Issue notice.

9. Learned senior counsel for the Defendants states, on instructions, that the sites enlisted at serial numbers ‘1’, ‘2’ and ‘3’ do not bear the signages; however, in the event any remnant of the impugned trademark is found at the said sites, necessary steps shall be taken within one (1) week, and a formal e-mail communicating such compliance shall be issued to the Plaintiff.

9.1. He states that with respect to the site no. ‘4’, the same has been taken over by the concerned Development Authority and is no more under the control of the Defendants. The statement of the Defendants is taken on record.

10. There is no dispute in terms of the injunction order dated 02.05.2025, there can be no signage at site no. 4 displaying the registered marks. The relevant paragraph 43 of the injunction reads as under: -

43. Consequently, till the next date of hearing, the defendants, their agents, employees, shareholders, investors, associate companies, and any other acting through them or on their behalf, or engaged in any manner in promoting their projects, are restrained from infringing any one or more of the plaintiff’s registered marks, viz “WORLD TRADE CENTER”, “WTC”, “ ” and “

”, including use as trademarks, trade names,

trading styles, signs, social media handles and usernames, nicknames, corporate names, domain names, websites, or in any other manner including in advertising and marketing, printed pamphlets or brochures, online or in web listings, or in physical brick and mortar applications.

11. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the Plaintiff is at liberty to directly write to the competent authority, which has control over the site no. ‘4’, to take appropriate steps for compliance with the paragraph 43 of the injunction order dated 02.05.2025. The competent authority is directed to ensure compliance of the injunction order within two (2) weeks from its receipt.”

3. Learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff states that, as per the updated information sites enlisted at Sr. No. 1 and 2 are under the control of the defendant nos. 1 and 5.

4. He states that, however, at the site enlisted at Sr. No. 2, the plaintiff has detected remnants of a infringing signage which