Key Points: - The suit seeks a permanent injunction restraining trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and passing off regarding the 'Arcuate Stitching Design' mark (!) (!) (!) . - The Defendants were found to have failed to abide by their undertakings dated 16th February, 2021, to remove infringing products within six months (!) (!) (!) . - The Court held that the mere exhibition of images attributed to the Defendants on e-commerce platforms is violative of the injunction order (!) (!) . - The 'Arcuate Stitching Design' mark is considered a well-known mark with acquired secondary meaning due to its use since 1873 (!) (!) (!) . - The suit is decreed awarding a permanent injunction and declaring the mark as a well-known mark in terms of paragraph 76(h) of the plaint (!) (!) . - The Defendants are restrained from seeking statutory rights by applying for trademarks or copyrights in respect of the 'Arcuate Stitching Design' mark (!) . - The Defendants are directed to ensure the removal of infringing images from e-commerce platforms within 30 days (!) (!) . - The Defendants are ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs as nominal costs for failing to abide by repeated undertakings (!) (!) . - The Court affirmed that the stitching pattern performs a trademark function by associating the jeans with the Plaintiff (!) (!) . - The case was disposed of with the next date of hearing cancelled (!) (!) .

What are the rights of the Plaintiff regarding the 'Arcuate Stitching Design' mark as a well-known trademark?

What constitutes a violation of the injunction order when infringing images are displayed on e-commerce platforms?

How to determine if a stitching pattern qualifies as a trademark deserving protection under the law?

$~9

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Decision: 24^th March, 2022

+

CS (COMM) 657/2021 & I.A. 16736/2021

LEVI STRAUSS AND CO.

..... Plaintiff

Through:

Mr. Dushyant K. Mahant, Mr. Urfee

Roomi and Mr. Vishesh Kumar,

Advocates. (M:9811600017)

versus

IMPERIAL ONLINE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED

& ORS.

..... Defendants

Through:

Ms. Shilpa Gamnani, Advocate.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1.

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present suit seeking permanent injunction restraining trademark

infringement, copyright infringement, passing off of trademark and other

reliefs has been filed by the Plaintiff - Levi Strauss & Co. In the suit, the

Plaintiff seeks protection of its stitching design, which is known as ‘Arcuate

Stitching Design’ mark. The said mark, as per the Plaintiff, was adopted in

1873 and is used on all the textiles including denim jeans, which are

manufactured and sold by the Plaintiff. The said mark is as extracted below:

2022:DHC:1222

3. The grievance of the Plaintiff is that the Defendants were also selling

denim jeans with the identical ‘Arcuate Stitching D