Delhi HC Takes Note Of Personality Rights of Renowned Cardiac Surgeon Dr Devi Prasad Shetty; Restrains Trademark Infringement Of Narayana Hrudayalaya Hospital
The Delhi High Court took into consideration the personality rights of a renowned cardiac surgeon Dr Devi Prasad Shetty and restrained the Defendants from misusing his publicity rights and infringing the trademarks of his Hospital Narayana Hrudayalaya.
The High Court was considering a suit seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of personality and publicity rights of plaintiff no. 1-Dr. Devi Prasad Shetty, as well as for restraining infringement of the registered trademarks of plaintiff no. 2(Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd.), misappropriation of goodwill, unfair trade practices, dilution, damages, delivery-up etc.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna asserted, “In the above circumstances, the plaintiffs have demonstrated a prima facie case for grant of injunction…”
Advocate Saikrishna Rajagopal represented the Plaintiffs while Advocate Ekta Sharma represented the Defendants.
The counsel appearing for the plaintiffs submits that the plaintiff no. 1, is a renowned cardiac surgeon, philanthropist and chairman of the plaintiff Hospital. The suit was instituted against several known and unknown defendants seeking to restrain them from misusing and exploiting the name, likeness, image, photos, videos and/or infringing any other personality and publicity rights of the Doctor and infringing the registered trademarks “NARAYANA HEALTH”, “NARAYANA HRUDAYALAYA”, of the Hospital and from claiming any association and/or connection with the plaintiffs.
It was brought to the Court’s attention that the plaintiff no. 1 also holds a US Patent as inventor- “System and Method for Facilitating Delivery of Patient-Care” – ‘A computer implemented method for facilitating delivery of patient-care in adherence with a standard of care clinical protocol is described’. He has also founded College of Nursing, Asia Heart Foundation along with Rabindranath Tagore International Institute of Cardiac Sciences (RTIICS), multi-super-speciality hospital in Kolkata.It was also submitted that plaintiff no. 2 adopted the mark ‘Narayana Hrudayalaya’ with its incorporation in the year 2000 and the mark ‘Narayana Health’ in April, 2001.
It was the plaintiff’s case that the defendants are unidentifiable third parties operating Facebook pages, viz. Medicine Me and QDD Milano Nightlife TV respectively, and misusing the name/likeness/ photos/videos of the plaintiff by creating and sharing fake and misleading videos on the said social media platform. This is being done to derive illicit commercial gains. It was also submitted that the impugned content utilizing the personality traits, such as name/images/voice/ likeness of plaintiff no. 1 poses a significant threat to the unsuspecting members of the public who may be misled into purchasing the purported health products promoted/ marketed using the plaintiff's persona.
The Bench took note of the submission that the plaintiff is a ‘celebrity’ in his own right and has a valid and enforceable personality right and the defendants’ unauthorized usage of the plaintiff’s image, likeness, videos, etc. for commercial gain and unjust enrichment, not only at the cost of the plaintiff but more importantly to the detriment of the members of the public, is in violation of the plaintiff’s personality rights under law.
“In the above circumstances, the plaintiffs have demonstrated a prima facie case for grant of injunction and, in case, no ex parte ad interim injunction is granted, the plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable loss. Further, balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs, and against the defendants”, the Bench held.
The Court listed the matter on April 15, 2025 and restrained the defendants from misusing the plaintiff's persona or name till the next date of hearing.
The Bench also restrained the defendants from misusing, misappropriating or exploiting the name or any other aspects of plaintiff ’s persona, which are solely and exclusively associated and identified with him for any commercial and/or personal gain, in any manner whatsoever, without the plaintiff’s express written authorization.
The Bench concluded the matter by restraining the defendants from infringing the Hospital’s Trademarks and blocking the contents used on social media platforms.
Cause Title: Dr Devi Prasad Shetty & Anr. v. Medicine Me & Ors. [Case No. CS(COMM) 1053/2024]
Appearance
Plaintiffs: Advocates Saikrishna Rajagopal, Shilpa Gupta, Deepika Pokharia and Naman Tandon
Defendants: Advocates Ekta Sharma, Pragya Jain, Surabhi Katare
