Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6599

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tushar Rao Gedela, J
Arjun Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
Artist Booking Company – Respondent
CS(COMM) 454/2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pravin Anand, Ameet Naik, Dhruv Anand, Madhu Gadodia, Dhananjay Khanna, Unnati Gambani, Nimrat Singh, Bhavya Verma, Aman Saraf
For the Respondents: Aditya Gupta, Rohit Venkatesan, Amee Rana, Vishesh Sharma, Anannya Gogoi, Satya Ranjan Swain, Naveen

Personality and publicity rights of a celebrity encompass the exclusive control over the commercial use of their name, image, voice, and persona, and unauthorized use of such attributes—especially through generative AI or deepfakes—constitutes a prima facie infringement warranting injunctive relief.

Headnote:The current suit involves a personality rights dispute arising from the unauthorized commercial exploitation and digital misappropriation of the plaintiff's identity, including the use of Artificial Intelligence to create deepfakes and obscene content. The primary statutes cited are the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Court determines that the plaintiff, as a well-known public figure, possesses protectable personality and publicity rights and grants an ex-parte ad-interim injunction to prevent further irreparable harm. The core issues concern the scope of personality rights, the threshold for infringement via digital media, and the responsibility of intermediaries in blocking infringing content. The court reasons that the unauthorized use of an individual's name, image, and voice for commercial gain or offensive manipulation constitutes a prima facie violation of these rights, noting, “any exploitation without permission or license of the plaintiff would demonstrably constitute infringement of plaintiff’s personality/publicity rights.” The Court directs identified infringing entities to cease the use of the plaintiff's identity, mandates specific intermediaries to takedown infringing links, and grants liberty to the plaintiff to seek further relief against newly discovered infringers.

Table of Content
1. procedural compliance and interlocutory applications for discovery and exemptions in commercial suits. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
2. establishing the plaintiff's public status and protectable personality attributes. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
3. assessment of personality rights infringement and the necessity of interim injunctive relief. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)
4. specific injunctive directions and procedural orders regarding suit management. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66)

I.A. 11962/2026 (Seeking discovery, inspection of defendant’s documents)

1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff under Order XI Rules 1, 3 and 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (‘CC Act’) read with Section 151 of CPC, seeking discovery, production and inspection of the defendants’ documents.

2. Issue Notice.

3. Let the reply to the application be filed within a period of four weeks from date. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

4. List before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 27.07.2026 for completion of service and pleadings.

5. List before the Court on 08.10.2026.

I.A. 11963/2026 (Additional Documents)

6. 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.

7. 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 within thirty (30) days.

8. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

I.A. 11964/2026 (Exemption from filing clearer copies)

9. This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Section 151 of CPC seeking exemption from filing clear copies of dim documents along with the captioned suit.

10. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. However, true, typed, translated and clear copies of dim documents with proper margins be filed within four weeks with an advance copy to the defendant.

11. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. 11965/2026 (Extension of time to file Court fees)

12. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 149 read with Section 151 of CPC, seeking extension of time to file the Court Fees.

13. Considering the submissions made in the present application, an extension of two weeks is granted to affix the requisite Court Fees.

14. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. 11966/2026 (Exemption from pre-institution mediation)

15. This is an application filed by the plaintiff seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation Mediation under Section 12A of the CC Act.

16. As the present matter contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar vs. T.K.D. Keerthi: (2024) 5 SCC 815, exemption from the requirement of pre-institution Mediation is granted.

17. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. 11967/2026 (Time to file certificate under 63(4) of BSA)

18. This is an application under Section 151 of the CPC, filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking time for filing the required certificate under Section 63(4)(c) of the Bharatiya Sakshiya Adhiniyam.

19. For the reasons stated therein, the same is allowed. The plaintiff is permitted to file the certificate as prayed for within four weeks with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the defendants.

20. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. 11968/2026 (Exemption)

21. This is an application under Section 80 read with Section 151 of CPC, filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking exemption from issuing notice to defendant no.17/ the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6599

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHITushar Rao Gedela, JArjun Kapoor – AppellantVersusArtist Booking Company – RespondentCS(COMM) 454/2026

Cases Referred (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tushar Rao Gedela, J
Arjun Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
Artist Booking Company – Respondent
CS(COMM) 454/2026