Delhi High Court: In a case concerning infringement of the registered and well-known trade mark “JIO” through websites offering lottery, gaming, payment-related and allied services, a Single Judge Bench of Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J., observed that the impugned websites prima facie satisfied the test of a rogue website as laid down in UTV Software Communication Ltd. v. 1337X.To, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8002. The Court restrained the defendant from using the impugned marks “JIO”, “JIO LOTTERY” and “JIO LOTTERY GAME” or any other mark identical with, near-identical to or deceptively similar to Reliance Industries Ltd.’s registered trade mark “JIO”, amounting to infringement of its registered trade marks.
The Court further directed the domain name registrars concerned to suspend the impugned accounts and websites and directed the intermediary operating the blogger platform to disable access to and take down the infringing webpage, together with the infringing content hosted thereon.
Background
The plaintiff-Reliance Industries Ltd. claimed to enjoy exclusive statutory and common law rights over the registered trade mark “JIO” and contended that the defendants were unlawfully incorporating Reliance Industries Ltd.’s registered and well-known trade mark “JIO”/ 
in its entirety as the leading, essential and dominant feature of their impugned marks, namely, “JIO”, “JIO LOTTERY” and “JIO LOTTERY GAME”, 
in relation to lottery, gaming, payment-related and allied services. Reliance Industries Ltd. alleged that the defendants were operating various websites, including www.jiolotteryi.com, www.jiolotterylogin.com, www.jiolotterygame.com, www.jiolottery.club and www.jiolottery.store, using marks identical with, near-identical to or deceptively similar to Reliance Industries Ltd.’s well-known trade mark “JIO”/ 
, thereby causing confusion, deception, dilution and injury to Reliance Industries Ltd. Accordingly, Reliance Industries Ltd. sought appropriate interim relief and blocking of the objectionable websites till adjudication of the application.
Analysis
The Court perused the objectionable websites and the content being used on the respective websites. The Court observed that the same prima facie seemed to satisfy the test of a rogue website, as laid down in UTV Software Communication Ltd. v. 1337X.To. In view of the aforesaid, the Court deemed it appropriate to issue directions restraining the use of the impugned marks and directing suspension of the objectionable websites. The Court further noted that Defendants 2—10, being domain name registrars, had been impleaded for the purposes of facilitating preservation and disclosure of complete registrant, account, contact, billing, payment and other identifying particulars and records available with them in relation to the impugned domain names.
Decision
-
The Court restrained Defendant 1 from directly or indirectly registering, operating, controlling, administering, maintaining, promoting, advertising, adopting, using or otherwise dealing in any manner with the impugned marks “JIO”, “JIO LOTTERY” and “JIO LOTTERY GAME”,
/ 
or any other mark identical with, near-identical to or deceptively similar to Reliance Industries Ltd.’s mark “JIO”/ 
, amounting to infringement of Reliance Industries Ltd.’s registered trade marks. -
Defendants 2—10 were directed to ensure suspension of Defendant 1’s accounts and websites enumerated in Annexure-A till further orders.
-
Defendant 11 was directed to disable access to and take down the impugned webpage hosted at https://wwwjiokbcindia.blogspot.com/ , together with the infringing content hosted thereon.
The Court further directed issuance of notice to the remaining defendants, filing of replies to the application within 4 weeks and rejoinders, if any, within 3 weeks thereafter. Compliance with Order 39 Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, was directed within 1 week.
The matter was listed for further consideration on 30 November 2026. The plaint was registered as a suit, summons were issued to the defendants, and the matter was directed to be listed before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 10 December 2026.
Also Read: Delhi HC Restrains Use of “KIND”-Formative Marks| SCC Times
[Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Rahul Meena, CS(COMM) 1043 of 2026, decided on 7-10-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Plaintiff: Ankit Sahni, Chirag Ahluwalia and Mohit, Advocates
For the Defendants: Aditya Gupta and Angela Arora, Advocates, Shivanshu Bhardwajn, SPC with Manish Rawat, GP
