{"id":372035,"date":"2026-01-08T12:00:59","date_gmt":"2026-01-08T06:30:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=372035"},"modified":"2026-01-09T18:07:03","modified_gmt":"2026-01-09T12:37:03","slug":"del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/","title":{"rendered":"Speculation can’t decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> While hearing a First Appeal under Order 41, Rule 31<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a>, challenging the territorial jurisdiction and quantum of damages granted by the District Court, the Division Bench of C. Hari Shankar, J, and *Om Prakash Shukla, J<\/span>, held that an award of damages requires a reasoned basis and evidence linking the damages to a proven injury. Accordingly, the Court held that since the District Court order was not based on any sound principle of law, it was liable to be set aside on account of lack of evidence.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The respondent, sole proprietor of Karmayogi Sharbhang Muni, instituted a commercial suit alleging infringement of her registered trademark ‘Nayan Jyoti’ in respect of ayurvedic medicines. It was pleaded that the mark had been coined and used since 1990, had acquired goodwill across India, and qualified as a well-known trademark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The appellant, engaged in manufacture and sale of ayurvedic products, was alleged to have adopted the mark ‘Amrit Nayan Jyoti’ in relation to similar goods. According to the plaintiff, the impugned mark was deceptively similar in name, trade dress, colour scheme and overall presentation, and was being marketed through an interactive website enabling sales within Delhi. A test purchase conducted through the appellant’s website resulted in delivery of the impugned product at Bhajanpura, Delhi.<\/p>\n

The District Judge (Commercial Court) had decreed the suit, granted permanent injunction and awarded damages of Rs. 48,35,610 along with costs. The appellant challenged the decree primarily on the grounds of lack of territorial jurisdiction and erroneous computation of damages.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/h3>\n

On the issue of territorial jurisdiction, the Court affirmed the trial court’s finding. Relying on the principles laid down in Banyan Tree Holding (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. A. Murali Krishna Reddy<\/span>, 2009 SCC OnLine Del 3780<\/a>, the Court held that the appellant’s website was not merely interactive but facilitated commercial transactions within Delhi, as evidenced by issuance of an invoice and delivery of goods in North-East Delhi. This satisfied both the ‘sliding scale’ and ‘effects’ tests, conferring jurisdiction on the Delhi courts.<\/p>\n

As regards infringement, the Court noted that the appellant had failed to file a written statement, had consented to decree of injunction, and did not dispute the respondent’s ownership of the registered trademark. The finding of infringement and the grant of injunction were therefore not interfered with.<\/p>\n

However, the Court found merit in the challenge to the quantum of damages. It held that while Section 135<\/a> of the Act<\/a> permits award of damages, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving the quantum through cogent evidence. Referring to Rule 20 of the Delhi High Court IPD Rules, 2022 and precedents including Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba<\/span> v. Tosiba Appliances Co.<\/span>, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 5594<\/a> the Court observed that damages cannot be based on speculative assumptions or hypothetical estimations.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the computation of damages was introduced only at the stage of written submissions and did not form part of evidence subjected to cross-examination. The assumptions drawn by the trial court regarding duration of infringement and monthly stock turnover, based solely on the Local Commissioner’s report, were held to be unsupported by the record. In the absence of a reasoned evidentiary basis, the award of damages was found unsustainable in law.<\/p>\n

The appeal was partly allowed. The Court upheld the findings on territorial jurisdiction and trademark infringement. The award of damages was set aside and the Court remanded the matter to the District Court for fresh determination limited to the issue of damages\/account of profits, after permitting parties to lead evidence.<\/p>\n

[B.C. Hasaram & Sons v. Nirmala Agarwal, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 8353<\/a>, decided on 12-11-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgement Authored by: Justice Om Prakash Shukla<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

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

For the Appellant:<\/span> Swathi Sukumar, Senior Advocate, Tusha Malhotra, Sugandha Yadav, Ritik Raghuwanshi, Rishika Aggarwal, Shrudula Murty, Pratibha Singh, Advocates<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Anupam Shrivastav, Senior Advocate, Nitin K Gupta, Sanchay Mehrotra, Parth Kansal, Advocates<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“It is the evidence which constitutes the bedrock for any award of compensatory or punitive damages.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67539,"featured_media":372038,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[96451,2543,96450,68986,88462,96452,52951,96449],"class_list":["post-372035","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-compensatory-damages-in-ip-cases","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-evidence-based-damages","tag-justice-c-hari-shankar","tag-justice-om-prakash-shukla","tag-punitive-damages-in-trademark-law","tag-trade-marks-act-1999","tag-trademark-infringement-damages"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Stressing on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases, Delhi High Court Sets Aside \u20b948 Lakh Award by a District Court on grounds of lack of proof.\" \/>\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\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Speculation can't decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Stressing on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases, Delhi High Court Sets Aside \u20b948 Lakh Award by a District Court on grounds of lack of proof.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-01-08T06:30:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-01-09T12:37:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prarthana Gupta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Speculation can't decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prarthana Gupta\" \/>\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\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-01-08T06:30:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-01-09T12:37:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382\"},\"description\":\"Stressing on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases, Delhi High Court Sets Aside \u20b948 Lakh Award by a District Court on grounds of lack of proof.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"evidence-based damages in trade mark cases\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Speculation can’t decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement\"}]},{\"@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\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382\",\"name\":\"Prarthana Gupta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Prarthana Gupta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/prarthana\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases | SCC Times","description":"Stressing on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases, Delhi High Court Sets Aside \u20b948 Lakh Award by a District Court on grounds of lack of proof.","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\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Speculation can't decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement","og_description":"Stressing on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases, Delhi High Court Sets Aside \u20b948 Lakh Award by a District Court on grounds of lack of proof.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-01-08T06:30:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-01-09T12:37:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prarthana Gupta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Speculation can't decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prarthana Gupta","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/","name":"Del HC on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp","datePublished":"2026-01-08T06:30:59+00:00","dateModified":"2026-01-09T12:37:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382"},"description":"Stressing on evidence-based damages in trade mark cases, Delhi High Court Sets Aside \u20b948 Lakh Award by a District Court on grounds of lack of proof.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"evidence-based damages in trade mark cases"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/08\/del-hc-on-evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Speculation can’t decide damages: Inside Delhi HC judgement clarifying evidence-based damages in trademark infringement"}]},{"@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\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382","name":"Prarthana Gupta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Prarthana Gupta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/prarthana\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/evidence-based-damages-in-trade-mark-cases.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":334022,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/10\/28\/delhi-high-court-injunction-yahoo-inc-trademark-infringement-yaahoo-mouth-freshener-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":372035,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court grants injunction in favor of Yahoo Inc. against trademark infringement by ‘YAAHOO!’ Mouth Freshener","author":"Arunima","date":"October 28, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Yahoo Inc.\u2019s investigation revealed that the defendant was producing a mouth freshener under the name \"YAAHOO! Mouth Freshener.\" that closely resembled the established trademark \"YAHOO!\", leading to allegations of trademark infringement and passing off.","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\/2024\/02\/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\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":278661,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/17\/delhi-high-court-awards-rs-25-lakhs-damages-to-daawat-basmati-rice-in-a-trade-mark-infringement-suit-restrains-manufacturer-from-selling-counterfeit-daawat-products\/","url_meta":{"origin":372035,"position":1},"title":"Delhi High Court awards Rs. 25 lakhs damages to \u2018Daawat\u2019 Basmati Rice in a trade mark infringement suit; restrains manufacturer from selling counterfeit \u2018Daawat\u2019 Products","author":"Editor","date":"November 17, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a suit for permanent injunction and damages for infringement of marks, passing off and unfair competition in relation to the mark \u2018DAWAT\/DAWAAT\u2019, the Single Judge Bench of Prathiba M. Singh, J. awarded Rs. 25 lakhs as damages and costs in favour of the plaintiff\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"competitive exam","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":266738,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/11\/trademark-infringement-of-starbucks-trademark-frappuccino\/","url_meta":{"origin":372035,"position":2},"title":"Infringement of Starbucks trademark FRAPPUCCINO | Del HC awards Rs 2 lakh in damages and 9 lakh costs","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: In a matter wherein Starbucks trademark \u2018frappuccino\u2019 was being infringed, Jyoti Singh, J., while observing that, FRAPPUCCINO trademarks have acquired formidable reputation and goodwill in India, awarded Starbuck Rupees 2 lakhs damages and 9 lakh costs. Instant suit had been filed to seek a decree of permanent\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":272153,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/24\/delhi-high-court-grants-permanent-injunction-royal-champ-compensates-damages-royal-stag-copyright-trademark-infrigement\/","url_meta":{"origin":372035,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court injuncts Royal Champ from using Royal Stag\/ Seagram marks; Similar label also amounts to copyright infringement; Directs Rs 20 lakh as damages","author":"Editor","date":"August 24, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: In a case where permanent injunction was sought against use of Royal Champs, a Gwalior Distilleries Private Limited product (\u2018defendants'), selling whiskeys under a deceptively similar name and label design and using the goodwill of Royal Stag, a Seagram India Private Limited product (plaintiffs), Navin Chawla, J.\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\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277897,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/23\/delhi-high-court-awards-2-lakhs-damages-and-over-13-lakhs-legal-fees-in-favour-of-starbucks-in-trademark-infringement-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":372035,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court awards 2 lakhs damages and over 13 lakhs legal fees in favour of Starbucks in trademark infringement case","author":"Editor","date":"November 23, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing and\/or passing off the Starbuck's registered trade mark, the Single Judge Bench of Prathiba M. Singh, J. held that the adoption of mark by the defendant was dishonest and intended to deceive customers, hence,\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\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":140981,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/07\/06\/delhi-high-court-awards-yahoo-inc-rs-5-lakh-damages-for-trademark-infringement\/","url_meta":{"origin":372035,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court awards Yahoo Inc. Rs. 5 lakh damages for trademark infringement","author":"Saba","date":"July 6, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court granted an ex parte order in favour of Yahoo Inc. restraining the defendant to use the domain name \u2018yahookochi\u2019 and also awarded damages of Rs. 5 lakh. The Court noted that there is no plausible explanation for the\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\/372035","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\/67539"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=372035"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/372035\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/372038"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=372035"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=372035"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=372035"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}