##PAGE1##

$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Delivered on: 27.10.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010086772025 + CS(COMM) 156/2025 WIPRO ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through: Ms. Sucheta Roy and Mr. Rishabh Rao, Advocates.

versus VEEPRO LIGHTS AND DECOR .....Defendant Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

JUDGMENT

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J [ORAL]

I.A.28116/2026(ApplicationunderOrderVIIIRule10readwithSection

151 CPC by the plaintiff)

1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff seeking pronouncement of judgment and decree against the defendant.

2. The plaintiff has filed a suit against the defendant inter alia seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark and passing off, byusingthetrademark/tradename“VEEPRO”whichisphoneticallyidentical and visually deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s registered and well-known trade mark/trade name “WIPRO”.

3. It is stated that the plaintiff had been conducting its business under the unique and inherently distinctive trademark “WIPRO” at least since the year

1977 through the plaintiff’s predecessor-in-interest.

4. It is also stated that the plaintiff, in order to statutorily safeguard its rights over the trademark “WIPRO” has obtained various registrations of its well-known trademark “WIPRO” and its formative trademarks falling under various classes under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). Amongst all the trademark registrations in favour of the plaintiff, as listed in Para 13 of the plaint, some of them are illustratively set out hereinbelow for the sake of brevity:

5. It is stated that the aforementioned registrations are valid, subsisting and in full legal force as of date. By virtue of the provisions of the Act, the plaintiff has the exclusive right to use its trademarks inter alia in respect of the goods and services for which the aforesaid trademarks are registered. Additionally, as mentioned in Section 31 of the Act, original registration of a trademark is prima facie evidence as to its validity.

6. It is stated that vide order dated 06.10.2025 passed by this Court in WiproEnterprisesPrivateLimited v. ShivamUdhyog&Anr.,CS(COMM) 945/2025, plaintiff’s trademark “WIPRO” has been declared as well-known trademark within the meaning and scope of Section 2(1)(zg) of the Act.

7. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff has extensive sales with respecttoitsproductsandservicesunderthetrademark/tradename“WIPRO”. The sale figures commencing from the financial year 1994-95 till the year 2023-24 has been set out in Para 17 of the plaint. The sales figure for the financial year 2023-2024 is stated to be INR 5,055.9 Cr.

8. Likewise, it is also the case of the plaintiff that it has invested substantial amount of money in the marketing and advertising of its products under the trademark ‘WIPRO’ over the course of years. The expenditure incurred by the plaintiff towards marketing and advertising has been given in Para 18 of the plaint, starting from the financial year 1994-1995 till the year 2022-2023. The expenditure on advertisement for the financial year 2023-

2024 is stated to be INR 702.2 Cr.

9. Itisstatedthatthedefendant,VeeproLightsandDécor,isalsoengaged inthebusinessofsellingandrenderinglightingandinteriorsolutionproducts. It came to the notice of the plaintiff on 14.02.2025 that the defendant has a website i.e. https://www.veeproled.com, wherein the defendant is prominently using the trademark and the tradename “VEEPRO”, and after acquiring the aforesaid knowledge, the plaintiff filed the present suit.

10. Ms. Sucheta Roy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff submits thatthis Court videorderdated21.02.2025restrainedthedefendants, its proprietors, partners or directors etc. from using, selling, offering for sale, supplying, advertising, exporting etc. any goods and services under the trademark/tradename “VEEPRO” or any trademark/tradenamewhich maybe identical or deceptivelysimila