Delhi HC Grants Ad Interim John Doe Order Against Entities Infringing Trademark Of Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas
The Delhi High Court granted ad-interim John Doe orders against individuals/entities infringing and misusing the name or trademark of eminent law firm Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas.
The Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held, “An ad interim injunction is granted restraining the Defendant No. 1 (and such other individuals/entities which are discovered during the course of the proceedings to have been engaging in infringing the Plaintiff’s exclusive rights), their proprietors, promoters, directors, partners, assigns, sister concern, affiliates, relatives, successors-in-interest, licensees, franchisees, representatives, servants, distributors, employees, agents etc. or anyone associated with them, from using the SAMCO Trade Marks and/or the name and photograph of the Plaintiff s Executive Chairman Dr. Shardul S. Shroff or any other members/partners/employees, singularly or in conjunction with any other word or monogram/logo as a trade mark, service mark, house mark, trade name, trading style, corporate name, website, domain name, messaging, group on any platform, e-mail address, social media handle or otherwise in any manner whatsoever, on or in relation to their business;”
Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta and Advocate Dushyant Manocha appeared for the Plaintiff
The present suit has been filed under Sections 27(2), 29, 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Sections 51 and 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, for inter alia, permanent injunction against trade mark infringement, copyright infringement, passing off, rendition of account of profits and/or damages.
An application was filed seeking ex-parte ad-interim injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It was submitted that the plaintiff is aggrieved on account of infringement, passing off, and illegal misappropriation of its intellectual property rights vesting in its registered “SAMCO” trademarks and the copyright vested therein by Defendant no. 1’s acts of surreptitious adoption and use of identical marks, “Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas”, as well as the use of the name and photograph of the plaintiff’s Executive Chairman, Dr. Shardul S. Shroff.
The plaintiff submitted that Defendant No. 1, was misrepresenting themselves as being associated with the Plaintiff and issuing fake and unauthorized legal notices and letters to third parties, inter alia, alleging copyright infringement. The legal notices/letter being addressed by defendant no. 1, bear the plaintiff’s registered and well-known “SAMCO” trademarks.
It was also submitted that the plaintiff apprehends that there may be a larger group of people involved in these illegal activities, details of whom are not available to the plaintiff at present. Thus, the plaintiff sought leave of the Court to implead all such persons and entities in the present suit for effective adjudication as soon as such details are disclosed by the present Defendant no. 1, or are uncovered at a later stage.
The Court directed, “The defendant no. 2 is directed to: (i) block/takedown the following email IDs, created by the Defendant No. 1, during the pendency of the present suit…; (ii) furnish the details including the user details and phone numbers associated with…; (iii) Upon disclosure of the phone numbers associated with the aforesaid Emails, the defendant no. 2 shall also with regard to each of the phone number discovered, furnish any other Email address, that may be associated therewith…Defendant nos. 3 and 4 are directed to issue necessary notification and directions to all the concerned telecom and internet service providers, and E-mail service providers to block/delete/remove access, during the pendency of the suit, all the Email IDs, telephone numbers, associated with the subject matter of the present suit.”
The Court also granted the Plaintiff to publish a Public Notice informing the general public, about the fact of the various false communications being issued by unknown persons, thereby, using and infringing the registered trademark, logo, trade name and names of representatives of the plaintiff firm, and also the fact regarding the filing of the present suit.
Accordingly, the Court issued notice to all the defendants and listed the matter for further date.
Cause Title: Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas and Co. v. John Doe and Ors.
Appearances:
Plaintiff: Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta and Advocate Dushyant Manocha
