C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 4/2021

Page 1 of 8

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of decision: 1^st February, 2022.

+

C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 4/2021, I.A. No. 11085/2021 (u/O-39R-1

&2) & I.A. No. 11087/2021 (for summoning of record)

THE POLO/LAUREN COMPANY L P

..... Decree Holder

Through:

Mr. Shivang Bansal with Mr.

Rahul Sharma and Mr. Saurabh

Arora, Advocates.

Versus

SANDEEP ARORA & ANR.

..... Judgement Debtors

Through:

Mr. Krishna Kumar Mishra

with

Mr.

Aashish

Kumar,

Advocate for R-1.

Ms. Suparna Srivastava, CGSC

with

Mr.

Tushar

Mathur,

Advocates for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

JUDGMENT

AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1.

This rectification petition has been filed under Section 50 of the

Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) seeking removal of the

registration made in the Register of Copyright in respect of impugned

artwork of the respondent no.1, namely, ‘SPORTS POLO’ under No. A-

136709/2021, obtained by the respondent no.1 in the year 2021.

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that (i) the petitioner is the registered

proprietor and user of the mark ‘POLO SPORT’ since the year 1967 along

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000446

C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 4/2021

Page 2 of 8

with a device mark of a ‘horse with a person riding it while flinging his club

to hit a ball in the sport of polo’; (ii) the trademarks of the petitioner are

formative in nature and the petitioner has created various combinations and

versions of the same; (iii) the formative marks of the petitioner are

registered as trademarks in India under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 in respect

of various goods and services inter alia clothing, textiles, foot-wear, soaps,

perfumes etc., details of which have been provided by the petitioner; (iv)the

trademark of the petitioner is a “well-known” mark, as recognized by this

Court in its judgment dated 19^th December, 2011 in CS(OS) 1763/2005

titled as The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. Vs. Rohit S. Bajaj and Ors. and

the aforesaid trademarks have acquired immense good will and reputation

over the years; (v) the said formative marks are capable of distinguishing

goods of the petitioner with those of the others; (vi) the artistic work

adopted by the respondent no.1 in the impugned copyright registration is an

infringement of the petitioner’s literary and artistic copyright as the

respondent no.1 has substantially reproduced in material form many aspects

of the petitioner’s registered marks; (vii) the respondent no.1 has also

misappropriated the words ‘Polo’ and ‘Sport’ in their entirety and the only

distinguishing feature is that the respondent no.1 has added four horses with

riders who are playing the game of polo, as compared to the petitioner’s

mark having one horse with a rider playing polo; (viii) the work of the

respondent no.1 is not an original literary/artistic work in respect of Section

13 (1) (a) of the Act; (ix) the Registry failed to act in terms of Section 45 of

the Act, as a careful search of the Register of Trademarks would have

clearly indicated the similarity between the petitioner’s trademarks, in

respect of which the copyright also subsists in the respondents’ artistic

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000446

C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 4/2021

Page 3 of 8

work; and, (x) since the work of the respondents is an unpublished

copyright, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the said mark

is removed from the Register of Copyrights. Accordingly, the counsel for

the petitioner submitted that the Registration Certificate granted in favour of

the respondent no.1 should be cancelled.

3.

A reply has been filed on behalf of respondent no.1 wherein it is

stated that (i) the said respondent has been using the words ‘ARRAS

SPORTS POLO’