SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
META PLATFORMS,INC. – Appellant
Versus
NOUFEL MALOL – Respondent
CS(COMM)-499/2020



CS(COMM.) 499/2020 Page 1 of 18

$~2

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Decision: 06.07.2022

+

CS(COMM) 499/2020 & IA 8765/2021

META PLATFORMS, INC.

..... Plaintiff

Through:

Mr.Pravin Anand, Ms.Vaishali

Mittal, Mr.Siddhant Chamola,

Mr.Shivang

Sharma,

Advs.

(Mobile-9999052646)

versus

NOUFEL MALOL & ANR

..... Defendants

Through:

None

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)

1. This suit has been filed by the plaintiff praying inter-alia for a

decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using

the mark „Facebake‟ and/or the domain name www.facebake.in; the

email IDs facebake.mail@gmail.com; facebake649@gmail.com, as

also for seeking rendition of accounts.

2. This Court, vide order dated 12.11.2020 was pleased to pass the

following ad-interim order:

“6. In the meanwhile, the defendant, his

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002524

CS(COMM.) 499/2020 Page 2 of 18

operating his website i.e. www.facebake.in.”

3. As none appeared for the defendant no.1, (who was the sole

defendant till that date), this Court confirmed the ad-interim order

dated 12.11.2020, vide the order of this Court dated 21.01.2021, and

further passed the following directions:

weeks.”

4. The plaintiff thereafter filed an application under Order XXXIX

Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, the „CPC‟),

being IA No.8765 of 2021, alleging therein that despite the above

orders being passed by this Court, the defendant no.1 incorporated a

company by the name of „Ehrlich Foods and Beverages Pvt. Ltd’ on

27.01.2021, and is one of its directors. The said company has

preferred a trade mark application bearing no. 4926784 under Class

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002524

CS(COMM.) 499/2020 Page 3 of 18

30, seeking the registration of a deceptively-similar mark

dated 30.03.2021.

5. The plaintiff also filed another application, being IA No. 10045

of 2021, under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC praying to implead the said

company as defendant no.2 in the suit.

6. The said company was then impleaded as the defendant no.2 in

the suit vide the order of the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) dated

11.08.2021.

7. None appeared for the defendant no.2 in spite of service, thus,

even the defendant no.2 was proceeded ex-parte vide an order of this

Court dated 10.11.2021.

8. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff-company has been

incorporated in the United States of America and adopted Facebook,

which is a world-famous, social networking service. It also launched a

mobile application and website under the mark „Facebook‟ in 2004.

Some key products/features of the plaintiff under the mark „Facebook‟

include, for example, Facebook Profile, Facebook News Feed,

Facebook Messenger, Facebook Groups, Facebook Events, Facebook

Video, Facebook Photos, Facebook Pages, Facebook Shops (launched

in May, 2020) and Facebook Marketplace (launched in October,

2016).

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002524

CS(COMM.) 499/2020 Page 4 of 18

9. The plaintiff has given details of registrations obtained by it in

its marks (hereinafter referred to as „Facebook marks‟) as under:

Sl. No.

Trademark

Class

Reg. No.

Reg. Date

Valid upto

1. FACEBOOK

35 & 38

1436663 22 March

2006 22 March

2026 2. THE FACEBOOK

35 & 38

1436949 23 March

2006 23 March

2026 3. FACEBOOK

25 1535619

28 February

2007 28 February

2027 4. FACEBOOK

9, 38 & 42

1622925 20 Nov

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top