{"id":343493,"date":"2025-03-11T18:00:08","date_gmt":"2025-03-11T12:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=343493"},"modified":"2025-03-18T16:23:50","modified_gmt":"2025-03-18T10:53:50","slug":"delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> A suit was filed by Puma SE (plaintiff) seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant from infringing its trademarks, along with reliefs for unfair competition, rendition of accounts, damages, and delivery up of the infringing goods. Mini Pushkarna, J., decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing, selling, or dealing in counterfeit Puma-branded products.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff is a globally recognized sports brand engaged in designing, developing, and marketing footwear, apparel, and accessories under its registered trademarks, including “PUMA” and its associated logos. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was engaged in the business of stocking, selling, and supplying counterfeit products bearing the plaintiff’s trademarks without authorization. The plaintiff contended that its trademarks have been registered in India since 1977, and its products have been available in the Indian market since the 1980s.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff’s brand was declared a well-known trademark by the Trademarks Registry on 30-12-2019. The plaintiff discovered large quantities of counterfeit Puma-branded shoes being sold in East Delhi in October 2022 and traced them to a manufacturing unit run by the defendant. The defendant was found to be manufacturing and distributing fake products bearing the plaintiff’s trademarks, thereby misleading the public and harming Puma SE’s brand reputation. Following the discovery of counterfeiting activities, the plaintiff initiated legal proceedings seeking relief against the defendant’s unlawful use of its trademarks.<\/p>\n

The Court had initially granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction on 18-10-2022, restraining the defendant from manufacturing, selling, or offering counterfeit products bearing the plaintiff’s trademarks. Despite directions, the defendant failed to file a written statement within the statutory period, leading to the court closing his right to file a response. Consequently, the defendant proceeded against ex-parte on 09-12-2024.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff then moved an application for summary judgment under Order XIIIA read with Order VIII Rule 10<\/a> and Section 151<\/a> of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908<\/a> (CPC), arguing that the defendant had no real prospect of defending the claims.<\/p>\n

A local commissioner was appointed by the Court to inspect the defendant’s premises, and the report revealed large-scale counterfeiting activities. The report documented the presence of counterfeit Puma-branded shoes and logos, along with manufacturing equipment used for imitation purposes. The plaintiff emphasized that the defendant had engaged in counterfeiting not just of Puma products but also of other well-known brands, including Adidas and Nike, thereby proving his intent to deceive consumers.<\/p>\n

The Court analyzed the evidence presented, including the Local Commissioner’s Report, which confirmed the large-scale counterfeiting activities at the defendant’s premises. It was observed that the defendant was producing and selling counterfeit goods that were identical in appearance to Puma’s original products, which could cause confusion among consumers.<\/p>\n

The Court relied on the ruling in Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Capital General Store<\/span>, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 613<\/a> which emphasized the severe impact of counterfeiting on brand value and consumer trust. It reiterated that counterfeiting is a “commercial evil” that requires stringent action. Additionally, the Court reiterated the principle that counterfeiting should be dealt with firmly to prevent brand dilution.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the defendant had not filed any defense, and the plaintiff’s claims remained uncontested. Since the plaintiff had placed sufficient evidence on record, the Court held that no purpose would be served in requiring further evidence, thereby allowing the summary judgment application.<\/p>\n

The Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and decreed the suit, granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing, selling, or dealing in counterfeit Puma-branded products. The Court held that the defendant’s activities amounted to trademark infringement and passing off, causing harm to the plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the Court awarded the plaintiff actual litigation costs amounting to Rs. 9,00,000\/-, including Rs. 1,00,000\/- towards the Local Commissioner’s fee and Rs. 8,00,000\/- towards legal expenses. The Court also imposed damages of Rs. 2,00,000\/- on the defendant as a deterrent against counterfeiting activities.<\/p>\n

[PUMA SE v. Mahesh Kumar, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 1449<\/a>, decided on 12-02-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Mr. Ranjan Narula, Mr. Shakti Priyan Nair and Mr. Parth Bajaj, Advocates for plaintiff<\/span><\/p>\n

None for defendants<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The infringing materials found on the site of the defendant are counterfeit goods of the plaintiff’s products, affixed with the plaintiff’s registered marks. A clear indicative of the counterfeiting activity towards the plaintiff’s products, are the observations and photographs as attached by the Local Commissioner in its report.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2543,69176,79674,79675,79672,79673,18071],"class_list":["post-343493","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-justice-mini-pushkarna","tag-puma-counterfeit-products","tag-puma-counterfeiting","tag-puma-trademark","tag-puma-trademark-infringement","tag-trademark-infringement"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi HC grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Puma SE, awarding \u20b911 lakh in damages and costs in a trademark infringement case against a counterfeit manufacturer selling fake Puma products.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Puma SE, awarding \u20b911 lakh in damages and costs in a trademark infringement case against a counterfeit manufacturer selling fake Puma products.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-03-11T12:30:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-18T10:53:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"headline\":\"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-03-11T12:30:08+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-18T10:53:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":710,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"Justice Mini Pushkarna\",\"Puma Counterfeit Products\",\"Puma Counterfeiting\",\"Puma Trademark\",\"Puma Trademark Infringement\",\"trademark infringement\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-03-11T12:30:08+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-18T10:53:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Puma SE, awarding \u20b911 lakh in damages and costs in a trademark infringement case against a counterfeit manufacturer selling fake Puma products.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/11\\\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/scc-editor_9\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi HC grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case| SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Puma SE, awarding \u20b911 lakh in damages and costs in a trademark infringement case against a counterfeit manufacturer selling fake Puma products.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer","og_description":"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Puma SE, awarding \u20b911 lakh in damages and costs in a trademark infringement case against a counterfeit manufacturer selling fake Puma products.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-03-11T12:30:08+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-03-18T10:53:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/"},"author":{"name":"Arunima","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"headline":"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer","datePublished":"2025-03-11T12:30:08+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-18T10:53:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/"},"wordCount":710,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","keywords":["Delhi High Court","Justice Mini Pushkarna","Puma Counterfeit Products","Puma Counterfeiting","Puma Trademark","Puma Trademark Infringement","trademark infringement"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/","name":"Delhi HC grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-03-11T12:30:08+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-18T10:53:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Puma SE, awarding \u20b911 lakh in damages and costs in a trademark infringement case against a counterfeit manufacturer selling fake Puma products.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/11\/delhi-hc-puma-trademark-infringement-case-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court grants \u20b911 lakh relief to Puma SE in trademark infringement case against counterfeit manufacturer"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":201887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/18\/summary-judgment-under-order-xiii-of-commercial-courts-act-2015-passed-for-infringement-of-trademark-sandisk\/","url_meta":{"origin":343493,"position":0},"title":"Summary judgment under Order XIII of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 passed for infringement of trademark SanDisk","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 18, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Manmohan, J. allowed a suit for permanent injunction, restraining the use of plaintiff\u2019s registered trademark SanDisk. The plaintiff is one of the largest dedicated provider of flash memory storage solutions under the house mark SanDisk. It is a Fortune 500 and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":298543,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/delhi-high-court-grants-injunction-in-favour-puma-for-design-infringement-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":343493,"position":1},"title":"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favour of PUMA for alleged design infringement of its RS-X 3D Series shoes","author":"Arunima","date":"August 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The main grievance of the plaintiff is that defendant 2 has by adopting a trade dress for its BERKINS brand range of shoes which is nearly identical to the plaintiff's RS-X range of shoes, sought to pass off its products as those of the plaintiff.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"puma rs-x 3d shoe design infringement","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/puma-rs-x-3d-shoe-design-infringement.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/puma-rs-x-3d-shoe-design-infringement.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/puma-rs-x-3d-shoe-design-infringement.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/puma-rs-x-3d-shoe-design-infringement.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":310975,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/08\/delhi-high-court-restrains-display-counterfeit-puma-products-on-indiamart-website-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":343493,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court restrains Indian Mart website from displaying counterfeit PUMA products","author":"Arunima","date":"January 8, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"There is nothing inherently illegal in IIL providing a drop down menu from which prospective sellers, on the Indiamart platform, can select the brand which they intend to sell. If, however, there are not, in place, sufficient checks and balances to prevent counterfeiters from misrepresenting themselves as genuine sellers, the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":274911,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/03\/delhi-high-court-no-need-for-injunction-in-favour-of-colgate-as-custom-authorities-denied-import-of-infringing-goods-in-india\/","url_meta":{"origin":343493,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court | No need for injunction in favour of Colgate as Custom authorities denied import of infringing goods in India","author":"Editor","date":"October 3, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a suit filed by Colgate Palmolive Company (\u2018plaintiff\u2019) seeking permanent injunction, restraining infringement of trademark COLGATE, copyright, trade dress etc. against unknown Defendants who are responsible for importing a container in India having products bearing marks which are deceptively\/ confusingly similar to the Plaintiffs\u2019\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Colgate","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Delhi-High-Court-No-need-for-injunction-in-favour-of-Colgate-as-Custom-authorities-denied-import-of-infringing-goods-in-India-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Delhi-High-Court-No-need-for-injunction-in-favour-of-Colgate-as-Custom-authorities-denied-import-of-infringing-goods-in-India-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Delhi-High-Court-No-need-for-injunction-in-favour-of-Colgate-as-Custom-authorities-denied-import-of-infringing-goods-in-India-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Delhi-High-Court-No-need-for-injunction-in-favour-of-Colgate-as-Custom-authorities-denied-import-of-infringing-goods-in-India-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Delhi-High-Court-No-need-for-injunction-in-favour-of-Colgate-as-Custom-authorities-denied-import-of-infringing-goods-in-India-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":292523,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/18\/delhi-high-court-restrains-biogen-serums-from-using-product-using-betnol-marks-being-similar-to-glaxo-group-betnesol-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":343493,"position":4},"title":"[Betnesol v Betnol]: Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction in favour of Glaxo Group Limited on failure to file written statement by Biogen Serums","author":"Arunima","date":"May 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court observed that the defendant has used the infringing mark \u2018BETNOL\u2019, which is identical to the plaintiff's mark \u2018BETNESOL\u2019 with the intent to springboard its business by drawing association with the plaintiff and its trademark to ride on the goodwill and reputation of the mark of the plaintiff.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255767,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/18\/presumption-of-infringement-under-s-293-trademarks-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":343493,"position":5},"title":"Presumption of infringement under S. 29(3), Trademarks Act: Madras HC grants permanent injunction in favour of Bharatmatrimony","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 18, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: G. Jayachandran, J., decided a matter with regard to infringing the registered trademark BHARATMATRIMONY. Present suit was filed for injunction restraining the defendant, men and agent from infringing the plaintiff\u2019s registered trademark BHARATMATRIMONY and its variant. Plaintiff\u2019s company was registered in using the internet as a platform\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343493","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=343493"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343493\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=343493"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=343493"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=343493"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}