M/S Novalife Consultancy Pvt Ltd vs Mr Bharat Sachdeva Trading As M/S ... on 30 October, 2025

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

M/S Novalife Consultancy Pvt Ltd vs Mr Bharat Sachdeva Trading As M/S ... on 30 October, 2025

Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                          $~48
                          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         CS(COMM) 1126/2025
                                    M/S NOVALIFE CONSULTANCY PVT LTD               .....Plaintiff
                                                  Through: Mr. Sudarshan Bansal, Mr. Shivang
                                                           Bansal, Mr. Amit Chanchal Jha and
                                                           Mr. Shivendra Pratap Singh, Advs.

                                                                  versus

                                    MR BHARAT SACHDEVA TRADING AS M/S NOVVALIFE
                                    KARNAL AND ORS                    .....Defendants
                                                Through: None.

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                            ORDER

% 30.10.2025 I.A. 25997/2025 (seeking exemption from advance service to the defendants)

1. This is an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ['CPC'], seeking exemption from advance service to the Defendants.

2. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that in compliance of the order dated 16.10.2025, the Defendants have been served through email.

3. He states that service was also affected through speed post and Defendant No. 3 has been duly served. He states, however, that Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 could not be served through speed post and the envelopes have been received back.

4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the application is disposed of.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 1 of 15

This is a digitally signed order.

5. The present application has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 of the CPC.

6. Having regard to the facts that the present suit contemplates urgent interim relief, and in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi1, exemption from the requirement of pre- institution mediation is granted to the Plaintiff.

7. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 25994/2025 (for additional documents)

8. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking leave to file additional documents under Order XI Rule 1(4) of CPC [as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015] read with Section 151 CPC, within thirty (30) days.

9. The Plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents will file the same within thirty (30) days from today, and it shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 ['DHC Rules'].

10. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

11. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025

12. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

13. Summons be issued to the Defendants by all permissible modes on filing of process fee. Affidavit of service be filed within two (2) weeks.

(2024) 5 SCC 815 CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 2 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46

14. The summons shall indicate that the written statement(s) must be filed within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the summons. The Defendants shall also file affidavit(s) of admission/denial of the documents filed by the Plaintiff, failing which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.

15. The Plaintiff is at liberty to file replication(s) thereto within thirty (30) days after filing of the written statement(s). The replication(s) shall be accompanied by affidavit of admission/denial in respect of the documents filed by the Defendants, failing which the replication(s) shall not be taken on record.

16. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to an order of costs against the concerned party.

17. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the DHC Rules.

18. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) on 28.11.2025.

19. List before Court on 30.03.2026.

I.A. 25993/2025 (under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC)

20. The present application has been filed by the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, seeking interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using the impugned mark NOVVALIFE.

21. Mr. Sudarshan Bansal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff, sets up the Plaintiff's case as under:

21.1 The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of providing migration advisory services for foreign countries, which includes rendering advisory, operational, logistical, and consultancy services to businesses, families, and CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 3 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

21.2 The Plaintiff is the proprietor of the wordmark NOVALIFE, and the logo /NOVALIFE GLOBAL RECRUITERS ['Plaintiff's trademarks']. The Plaintiff uses NOVOLIFE as a part of its tradename Novalife Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.

Background and Origin of the NOVALIFE Mark 21.3 Mr. Monal Sachdeva, the founder and the Managing Director of the Plaintiff, is the predecessor of the Plaintiff Company. He adopted and created the wordmark NOVALIFE and the logo in 2016, as a trademark in relation to the business of designing, manufacturing and marketing kiosks/machines aimed at helping individuals assess their fitness to drive, particularly in relation to drunk driving regulations.

Thereafter, in June 2016, he founded and incorporated a company under the tradename M/s Novalife Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly he permitted the said company to use the said trademark/tradename NOVALIFE for conducting the said business under the aforesaid goods, as a non-exclusive permitted user, through an Authorization Letter dated 04.07.2016.

21.4 In 2018, he strategically diversified his business focus to include migration advisory for foreign countries, and dropped the use of the word INNOVATIONS from logo and replaced it with CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 4 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46 GLOBAL RECRUITERS, and started using the logos and , retaining the word/mark NOVALIFE as its essential feature. Additionally, the font, writing style and the artistic work involved therein also form a part of the essential features of the mark.

He also adopted and obatined domain registrations for the domain names www.novalifeglobal.com and www.novalifeforeignjobs.com, which also bears the word NOVALIFE as its essential feature. 21.5 In October 2018, he formed a partnership with Defendant No.1/Mr. Bharat Sachdeva, and constituted a Partnership Firm vide Partnership Deed dated 18.10.2018, in which Mr. Monal Sachdeva held 60% equity and control in the said partnership firm. He permitted the firm to use the said trademark/trade name NOVALIFE for conducting business under the aforesaid services, as non-permitted user. However, despite the oral consent for permitted user, it was clearly agreed and understood by both the parties that the said trademark/tradename would not be brought into the stock-in- trade or form part of the assets of the company, and that the said non- exclusive permitted use would not in any manner restrict or diminish the propeitary rights of Mr. Monal Sachdeva in the said NOVALIFE trademark/trade name, and would be at liberty to open other offices and entities for business under the said trademark/tradename. 21.6 Thereafter, in 2022, Mr. Monal Sachdeva expanded his business and incorporated the Plaintiff Company/M/s Novalife Consultancy Pvt. Ltd, bearing the word/mark NOVALIFE as its tradename. He holds 99% of the CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 5 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

He therefore permitted the Plaintiff Company to use the said trademark/tradename NOVALIFE and the logo for conducting business as a non-exclusive permitted user and also permitted the Plaintiff Company to obtain trademark registrations for the said trademark NOVALIFE in its name, through an Authorization letter dated 01.04.2022.

21.7 Defendant No.1 never raised any objection to the formation of the Plaintiff Company or its obtaining trademark registrations in its own name. However, gradually various disputes arose owing to Defendant No. 1 unauthorized attempts to use a deceptively similar trademark NOVVALIFE in relation to the same line of services, which Mr. Monal Sachdeva opposed as being violative of his exclusive rights, he had no objection to Defendant No. 1 carrying on a separate business; however, he was strictly opposed to Defendant No. 1 using an identical or deceptively similar trademark. In due course, differences arose between the partners, and the partnership eventually became defunct.

21.8 Eventually in 2025, there was a complete Settlement of liabilities and asset distribution between the partners, and a formal Partnership Dissolution Deed dated 23.01.2025 was executed between Mr. Monal Sachdeva and Defendant No. 1, formally dissolving the partnership, whereby Defendant No. 1 unequivocally recognized the ownership rights of Mr. Monal Sachdeva in the said NOVALIFE trademark/trade name and undertook to never use the same or similar mark or name.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 6 of 15

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46 21.9 The partners also executed a Special Resolution for de-registration of the firm dated 23.01.2025, whereby it was resolved that, post-dissolution, the affairs of the firm would be managed solely by Mr. Monal Sachdeva. 21.10 In September 2025, with a view to streamline and centralize the ownership and management of the NOVALIFE trademark/tradename, Mr. Monal Sachdeva executed a Deed of Assignment dated 18.09.2025, thereby assigning all his rights, title, and interest in the said NOVALIFE trademark/tradename in favour of the Plaintiff. Pursuant to the said Assignment, the Plaintiff has become the sole and absolute proprietor of the NOVALIFE trademark/tradename, with full rights to use, exploit, license, and enforce the same.

21.11 In view thereof, Plaintiff's earliest trademark registration is for the device bearing TM No.5396919 in class 35, application dated 0504.2025. Plaintiff also has registration for the word mark NOVALIFE bearing TM No. 6052993 in class 35, application dated 04.08.2023 with user date as 02.02.2022 and for the device bearing TM No. 6216283 in class 35, application dated 12.12.2023 with user date as 02.02.2022.

21.12 The Plaintiff in its registrations had claimed user date in trademark bearing TM No.5396919 as 'proposed to be used' and as 02.02.2022 in the subsequent two applications, in view of its incorporation in the year 2022 and based on the legal advice received at that time. However, it is evident that the use of the said trademark by its predecessor-in-title, Mr. Monal Sachdeva, predates the aforesaid period, commencing in the year 2016 in CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 7 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

21.13 The artistic elements and device marks forming part of the Plaintiff's logo constitute original artworks of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has been carrying on its services and business under the NOVALIFE trademark/tradename both in the physical domain and online, inter alia, through its website www.novalifeforeignjobs.com. 21.14 The market and trade recognize the Plaintiff's said services under the NOVALIFE trademark/tradename as originating exclusively from the Plaintiff, and associate the said mark with the Plaintiff's source and high- quality services alone.

Overview of the Defendants 21.15 To the best of Plaintiff's knowledge Defendant No.2/M/s Novvalife Karnal and Defendant No.3/M/s Novvalife Sri Ganganagar are the sole proprietary concerns of Defendant No.1, and/or Defendant No.1 has a vital role in the management and functioning of Defendant Nos. 2 and 3.

Defendant No. 3 represents itself as an associate of Defendant No. 2 on its webpages hosted on Instagram and Facebook.

21.16 Defendant Nos. 1, 2, and 3 shall be referred to as 'Defendants' hereinafter.

Infringement by the Defendants 21.17 In July 2025, the Plaintiff learnt that the Defendants are offering the same/similar services as that of the Plaintiff under mark NOVVALIFE. The Plaintiff also came across videos of inauguration of the Defendants' new office under the said mark.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 8 of 15

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46 21.18 The Defendants are engaged in the similar business of providing migration and recruitment advisory services and allied services thereto. They have adopted the following in relation to its services and business:

                                       i.     The marks NOVVALIFE and                                                              .
                                      ii.     The tradename M/s Novvalife Karnal and/or M/s Novvalife

Global Recruiters and M/s Novvalife Sri Ganganagar.

iii. The domain name www.novvalife.in.

21.19 The aforesaid are collectively referred to as the 'impugned mark/tradename/domain name'.

21.20 The impugned mark/tradename/domain name adopted and used by the Defendants in relation to its allied services is identical and is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's trademarks, in each and every aspect including phonetically, visually, structurally, conceptually and its basic and essential feature. The Defendants have simply added and extra 'V' in its impugned NOVVALIFE mark/tradename/domain name.

21.21 It is stated that the Defendants are not only using an identical and deceptively similar mark/tradename/domain, but are also carrying out its infringing activities on social media platforms and e-commerce platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, etc. The overall 'look and feel' of the Defendant's website and of its various webpages hosted on the social media platforms, including their layout, structure, design, elements, visual presentation, colour scheme, and font styling, are all a deliberate and slavish imitation of the Plaintiff's official website.

The contents of the Defendant's website and webpages, including the descriptions of services, headings, navigational flow, icons, and CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 9 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

21.22 On enquiry it was revealed that the Defendants had recently commercially started its use and activities under the impugned mark/tradename. It was also revealed that the Defendants through their trade network are also physically offering, soliciting, marketing, advertising, promoting, networking, publishing, exhibiting, communicating and marketing offerings of its services in the markets of New Delhi under the impugned mark/tradename.

21.23 It is stated that the Defendants are carrying on the business of overseas recruitment on a large scale without possessing the mandatory Recruitment Agent Licence as required under the provisions of the Emigration Act, 1983.

21.24 Aggrieved by the aforesaid acts, the Plaintiff lodged written complaints dated 17.07.2025 and 28.07.2025 with the Protector of Emigrants, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, at Jaipur and Delhi respectively, highlighting the Defendants' illegal and unlicensed recruitment activities. The Protector of Emigrants, Delhi, has thereafter forwarded the Plaintiff's complaint to the Inspector General of Police, Ambala, for necessary action, vide email dated 29.07.2025.

22. Mr. Sudarshan Bansal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that the Defendants were always aware of the Plaintiff and of the Plaintiff's trademarks, and of the Plaintiff's rights, use, goodwill and all benefits therein, at the time of its adoption and use of the impugned trademark/tradename/domain name. Defendant No.1 had specifically undertaken vide Partnership Dissolution Deed dated 23.01.2023, to not use CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 10 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46 or associate with the name M/s NOVALIFE, its logo, trade name, trademarks, or any identical, similar, or derivative marks in any manner whatsoever, including but not limited to business, promotional, or digital platforms.

22.1. He states that despite the Dissolution deed, the Defendants have dishonestly adopted and have started using the impugned NOVVALIFE mark/tradename/domain name with the sole intention to deceive the public and to benefit from the Plaintiff's established rights. He states that the Defendants are not the proprietor of the impugned mark and its adoption thereof is without leave and license of the Plaintiff. 22.2. He states that the Defendants are infringing the Plaintiff's trademarks knowingly as is evident from a video uploaded by the Defendants on YouTube wherein Defendant No.1 expressly admitted that he separated from the Partnership with Mr. Monal Sachdeva around the year 2023 and further acknowledged that confusion exists in the market on account of the use of the impugned mark/tradename/domain name.

22.3. He states that, due to the deceptive similarity between the rival marks, tradenames, and domain names, and considering the identical nature of the competing services and business activities, there is a clear likelihood of confusion among consumers and the public at large, who are likely to be deceived into believing that the impugned mark NOVVALIFE, along with the corresponding tradename and domain name adopted by the Defendants, originates from or is in some manner associated with the Plaintiff. The similarities in the impugned mark/tradename/domain/artistic works/logos/labels vis-à-vis the Plaintiff's trademark/tradename/domain/artistic works/logos/labels are not a CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 11 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46 coincidence, the Defendants have directly copied the same in order to ride upon the Plaintiff's established goodwill and reputation. Court's Findings

23. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff and perused the record.

24. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that advance service of the suit paper-book was served upon Defendant No.3, by speed post, and by email on Defendant No.1 and Defendant No.2. However, none appears on behalf of the Defendant.

25. A bare perusal of the plaint and comparison of the marks, it is prima facie evident that the impugned mark NOVVALIFE/ is visually, phonetically, structurally, and deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's wordmark NOVALIFE and device mark .

26. The Defendants have been aware about the Plaintiff's goodwill and reputation in virtue of Defendant No.1's prior partnership with Plaintiff's predecessor. Therefore, the adoption of a deceptively similar mark is prima facie dishonest and a violation of the Partnership Dissolution Deed dated 23.01.2025. Extract of Defendant No.1's undertaking in the Dissolution Deed whereby he gave up his rights in the mark NOVALIFE, is reproduced as under:

"3. Rights to Business Name, Trademark, and Related Marks:

• The First Partner will retain exclusive rights to the name 'M/S Novalife', including all associated licenses, permits, trademarks, trade names, and any similar marks.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 12 of 15

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46 • The Second Partner shall not use or associate with the name 'M/s Novalife', its logo, tradename, trademarks, or any similar or derivative marks in any capacity, including but not limited to business, promotional, or digital platforms."

It is stated that the First Partner in the aforesaid extract is Mr. Monal Sachdeva and the Second Partner is Defendant No. 1

27. Additionally, upon perusal of the video referred to in paragraph '15.2' of this Order, it is evident that the Defendant No. 1 is aware that the impugned mark adopted by them is deceptively similar to that of the Plaintiff and is causing confusion to the customers. The mere addition of the letter 'V' does not alter the overall commercial impression of the mark and continues to mislead customers into associating the Defendants with the Plaintiff.

28. This is a case of triple identity where the Mark is deceptively similar, the service category is identical, and the trade channel, as well as the consumer base, is identical. The Plaintiff, being the prior user, adopter, and the registered owner of the Mark NOVALIFE/ , are entitled to protection. To an unwary consumer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection, the marks are likely to appear identical, thereby leading to confusion regarding the affiliation between the parties.

29. In the overall conspectus, Plaintiff have made out a prima facie case for the grant of injunction against the Defendants. This Court is satisfied that if ex parte ad interim injunction is not granted at this stage, irreparable harm/ injury would be caused to the Plaintiff. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Plaintiff, and against the Defendants.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 13 of 15

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46

30. Accordingly, until the next date of hearing, the following direction is issued:

i. The Defendants, their partners, principals, proprietor, directors, officers, employees, agents, distributors, franchisees, suppliers, licensees, affiliates, subsidiaries representatives, group companies and assignees is/ are restrained from using, offering its services, marketing and advertising its business whether through offline or online means, and/or allowing or permitting third parties to use, market and/or advertise the impugned marks NOVVALIFE/ and/or any other trade mark or name identical and/or similar to the Plaintiff's registered trademark NOVALIFE/ . and its formatives either as a trademark, trade name, corporate name, domain name, social media handles or part thereof in relation to identical or any allied or cognate goods/services in any manner whatsoever.

31. Issue notice to the Defendants through all permissible modes, upon filing of process fees, returnable on the next date of hearing.

32. Let reply to this application be filed within a period of four (4) weeks, from receipt of notice.

33. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter.

CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 14 of 15

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46

34. Compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC be done within a period of two (2) weeks from today.

35. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) on 28.11.2025.

36. List before Court on 30.03.2026.

37. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of the order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J OCTOBER 30, 2025/ng/aa CS(COMM) 1126/2025 Page 15 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 22:38:46

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders