Xx vs Y on 3 November, 2025

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Xx vs Y on 3 November, 2025

Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                          $~29
                          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         CS(COMM) 1169/2025 & I.A. 27151-27156/2025
                                    XX                                                                    .....Plaintiff
                                                                  Through:            Mr. Kunal Khanna, Mr. Madhav
                                                                                      Anand, Mr. Krtin Bhasin, Mr.
                                                                                      Yashveer Singh, Mr. Udit Sharma and
                                                                                      Mr. Kaulik Mitra, Advs.
                                                                  versus

                                    Y                                                                     .....Defendant
                                                                  Through:            None

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

% 03.11.2025 I.A. 27153/2025(seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation)

1. This is an application under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 filed by the Plaintiffs seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation and settlement.

2. Having regard to the facts that the present suit contemplates urgent interim relief and in light of the judgement of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi1, exemption from the requirement of pre- institution mediation is granted to the Plaintiffs.

3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 27154/2025(seeking masking of identities)

4. This is an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, ['CPC'] filed by the Plaintiffs to mask the identities of the 1 (2024) 5 SCC 815 CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 1 of 12 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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52 parties.

5. The Plaintiffs apprehend the failure of the local commission if the identity of the defendant is revealed and has requested masking of identities of parties, till the filing of the report of the Local Commissioner in compliance with the Practice Direction No.139/Rules/DHC dated 27.05.2025.

6. Considering the submissions made before this Court, the exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.

7. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 27155/2025(seeking exemption from service to defendant)

8. The present application has been filed under Section 151 of CPC, on behalf of the Plaintiffs seeking exemption from service to the Defendant.

9. In view of the fact that the Plaintiffs have sought an ex parte ad- interim injunction along with the appointment of a Local Commissioner, the exemption from effecting service upon the Defendant at this stage is granted.

10. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 27156/2025 (seeking extension of time to file court fees)

11. This is an application under section 149 CPC read with Section 151 CPC, seeking extension of time to file court fees.

12. Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs submits that the court fee stands deposited. He states that the Court Fees certificate shall be filed within one (1) week.

13. In view of the aforesaid submission, the time to deposit the Court Fees certificate is extended by one (1) week. The application stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 2 of 12

This is a digitally signed order.

14. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

15. Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs states that a fresh affidavit of the Investigator with respect to procurement of infringing products will be filed during the course of the day. The same is directed to be taken on record and directed to be served on the Defendant along with the paper-book.

16. Summons be issued to Defendant by all permissible modes on filing of the process fee. An affidavit of service be filed within two (2) weeks.

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

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

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

20. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

21. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) on 17.12.2025.

22. List before Court on 13.04.2026.

I.A. 27151/2025 (application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2)

23. This is an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 3 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.

24. The learned counsel for the Plaintiffs sets up the Plaintiffs' case as under:

24.1. Plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 are group companies carrying on business under the house mark HERO. The trademark HERO is also used in label and device marks / ['HERO marks'].

24.2. Plaintiff No. 2 is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling motorcycles, scooters, their parts and accessories, under the trademark 'HERO' since 09.04.1985. The said business of the Plaintiff No. 2 is being carried on under the tradename, i.e., 'HERO MotoCorp.', and HERO marks. 24.3. Plaintiff No.1's earliest registration of the word mark HERO in Class 4 is Trademark Registration No. 220577, with the date of registration being 15.09.20112.

Plaintiff No.2, being a HERO Group Company, uses these trade marks by virtue of an authorisation letter dated 28.08.2018 issued by Plaintiff No.1 to Plaintiff No.2.

24.4. The Plaintiffs also use the HERO marks on a diverse range of products, manufactured under the sub-brand HERO GENUINE PRODsUCTS, which go through a strenuous test of quality before being deemed fit for sale.

24.5. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that the Plaintiffs, in October 2025, learnt that the Defendant, K.D. Rubber Industries, is carrying out the 2 Details of Plaintiff No.1's trademark registrations have been set out in paragraph '15' of the plaint.

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 4 of 12

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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52 manufacturing and sale of counterfeit two-wheeler spare parts under the Plaintiff No.1 's registered trademark "HERO".

24.6. It is stated that the Defendant is also selling the counterfeit product on e-platforms such as Indiamart and has the registered GST No. 06CPUPD8739N1ZY, which was found registered as a proprietorship firm in the name of Deepak, since 14.09.2017.

24.7. Upon investigation, the Plaintiffs' investigator obtained a sample of the counterfeit product, namely the RUBBER COUPLING. The sample was received in an unpackaged and loose condition. A comparison chart of the products is set out as under:

24.8. It is stated that every product manufactured and sold under the brand "HERO" is mandatorily contained in a sealed package and bears a Unique CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 5 of 12 This is a digitally signed order.

The UPI code is a verification tool to ascertain whether a product manufactured under the brand HERO is genuine or counterfeit and the absence of such UPI code and sealed packaging on the Defendant's products is a clear indicator that the same is not genuine which is being illicitly manufactured and sold by the Defendant.

24.9. It is stated that, since the products in question are two-wheeler spare parts, the sale of any inferior quality products by the Defendant under Plaintiff No. 1's registered trade mark poses a serious threat to public road safety, apart from causing grave harm to the hard-earned goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiffs.

25. Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs states that such imitation of the HERO marks by the Defendant for its own products is likely to confuse customers into believing that the Defendant's products are associated with or endorsed by the Plaintiffs. This unauthorised use is causing continuous harm to the Plaintiffs, including brand dilution, loss of sales, and reputational damage.

25.1. He refers to the screenshots of the listings of the Defendant on IndiaMart as reproduced at paragraph 25 of the plaint to contend that on its listing page Defendant holds himself out to be a manufacturer of spare parts and specifically represents a product range with the mark HERO for instance HERO SPLENDOR CHAIN COVER RUBBER and HERO SPLENDOR BRAKE SHOE

26. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs and has perused the record.

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 6 of 12

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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52

27. The Plaintiffs have produced the sample of the spare part RUBBER COUPLINGS procured by its investigator from the Defendant. The spare part is in a loose condition, without any packaging however, the Plaintiffs' trademark HERO is embossed on the infringing product. The comparison is set out at paragraph '24.7' of this order.

28. Inspection of the product manufactured by the Defendant shows that it is unauthorizedly embossing Plaintiff's trademark HERO on its products. This conduct of the Defendant constitutes a deliberate misrepresentation, intended to exploit the Plaintiffs' established goodwill and mislead the public into believing that the Defendant's goods are connected with or endorsed by the Plaintiffs, when no such association exists. The Defendant cannot have any reasonable justification for embossing Plaintiff's trademark on its products. The submission of the Plaintiffs that the Defendant in its e- listing on IndiaMart is misrepresenting that it manufactures HERO spare parts also lends credence to the submission of the Plaintiffs that the Defendant has consciously and deliberately embossed the mark HERO on its product to mislead the unwary consumer with respect to its association with the Plaintiffs.

29. The Defendant is using the impugned mark on identical goods in the same line of business, whilst catering to the same class of consumers as the Plaintiffs. Consequently, there is inevitably going to be a likelihood of confusion, and an unwary customer with average intelligence and imperfect recollection will associate the Defendant's impugned product with the Plaintiffs' products.

30. In the overall conspectus, the Plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case for the grant of ex-parte ad-interim injunction against the Defendant.

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 7 of 12

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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52 This court is satisfied that if an ex-parte ad-interim injunction is not granted at this stage, irreparable harm/injury would be caused to the Plaintiffs. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Plaintiffs, and against the Defendant.

31. Accordingly, till further orders, the Defendant, along with its proprietor/partners, associates, agents, officers, employees, distributors, franchisees, representatives, assigns, stockiest are hereby restrained from:

i. Manufacturing, trading, supplying, selling, marketing, in any manner including online sale or dealing in any other way, any goods and/or any other products including accessories under the Plaintiffs' HERO trademarks including the device marks or any other mark/logo which is identical and similar to the Plaintiffs' HERO trademarks and/or device marks;

ii. Using any indicia whatsoever to show any association or affiliation or connection of the Defendant or its products with Plaintiffs. iii. The Defendant will take immediate steps for removing references to Plaintiffs' HERO trademarks from all its online listings.

32. In view of the fact that the Plaintiffs have sought appointment of a Local Commissioner to seize the infringing product bearing the impugned marks, the very purpose of the grant of ex-parte ad-interim injunction would be defeated if the Defendant is given notice contemplated in Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC prior to the execution of the commission. Hence, it is directed that the Plaintiffs shall serve notice under Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC at the time of execution of the Local Commission, which shall not be later than two (2) weeks from today. An affidavit of compliance must be filed within two (2) weeks.

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 8 of 12

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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52

33. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) on 17.12.2025.

34. List before Court on 13.04.2026.

I.A. 27152/2025 (seeking appointment of local commissioner)

35. This is an application filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 read with Section 151 of CPC for appointment of a Local Commissioner.

36. In order to ensure that the injunction is fully complied with and to preserve the evidence of infringement, this Court deems it appropriate to appoint one (1) Local Commissioner; the appointment is confined thereto:

S.No. Address Particulars

1. K.D. Rubber Industries situated at Mr. Nikhil Palli, Advocate Plot No.2, Gali No.4, Vill. E. No. D/768/2013 Sahupura, Ballabgarh, Bypass M. No. 9811676973 Road, Faridabad, Haryana -

121004

37. The mandate of the Local Commissioner is as under: -

i. The Local Commissioner shall visit the premises of the Defendant as mentioned above, to inspect and seize products of the Defendant bearing the marks of the Plaintiffs.

ii. The Local Commissioner is permitted to seize the products bearing the impugned marks at the above premises and if knowledge is acquired of any other premises where the products could be stored, the Local Commissioner is free to record the same and then visit the other premises and conduct a seizure there as well. iii. The Local Commissioner shall also inspect and seize any products/materials including pamphlets, brochures, stickers, packaging materials, dyes or blocks used for preparing the manufacturing materials, display boards, sign boards, advertising CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 9 of 12 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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52 material, dyes or blocks, unfinished, packed, unpacked products bearing the impugned marks or any other documents, wrapper etc. so that it can be ensured that no fresh manufacturing of the products bearing the impugned marks can take place. iv. The Local Commissioner shall also obtain the details as to since when products bearing the impugned marks are being used by the Defendant and obtain copies of the accounts, if the same is found to be sold in market.

v. The Local Commissioner shall obtain accounts including ledgers, stock registers, invoice books, receipt books, cash books, purchase and sale records and any other books of record or commercial transactions kept at the premises of the defendant and take a photocopy and/or record of all such transactions that pertain to infringing products, if any. The defendant shall cooperate and give passwords to the computers and the files containing the accounts, if the same is stored on the computer or a specific software. vi. After preparation of the inventory, the products bearing the impugned marks, in fully manufactured or unfinished condition, including packaging materials, advertising, promotional materials, pamphlets, brochures, boxes, videos, hoardings, brochures, banners, cartons and other material bearing the impugned marks or the marks, which are similar to the plaintiffs' marks, shall be released to the defendant on Superdari. The monetary value of the stock shall also be ascertained.

vii. Upon being requested, the concerned jurisdictional police authority, the Commissioner of Police/Superintendent of Police CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 10 of 12 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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52 and/or the Station House Officer ('SHO'), shall render necessary cooperation for execution of the commission, as per this order. viii. The Local Commissioner is also permitted to break open the locks, with the help of the local police, if access to the premises, is denied to the Commissioners.

ix. The Local Commissioner is permitted to take photographs and videography of the proceedings of the commission, if it is deemed appropriate. Two (2) representatives of the Plaintiffs, which may include a lawyer, are permitted to accompany the Local Commissioner.

x. The Local Commissioner, while executing the commission, shall ensure that there is no disruption to the business of the Defendant, except for the purposes of the execution of the commission. The commission shall be executed in a peaceful manner. xi. Copy of the order and complete paper book shall be served by the Local Commissioners upon the Defendant at the time of execution of commissions.

38. The order passed today, shall not be uploaded for a period of two (2) weeks to enable the execution of the commissions.

39. The Local Commission shall be executed within two (2) weeks. The report of the Local Commissioner shall be filed within two (2) weeks thereafter.

40. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed at Rs. 2,00,000/- excluding out-of-pocket expenses, travel expenses, accommodation, etc., which is to be borne by the Plaintiffs.

41. In terms of the foregoing, the present application stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 11 of 12

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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52

42. Either the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs or the learned Local Commissioner is directed to collect a certified copy of this order from the Registry (Dispatch Branch) before for execution of the Commission.

43. The learned Local Commissioner shall carry the certified copy of this Order for execution of the Commission and a copy of the same shall be served upon the Defendant by the learned Local Commissioner at the time of the execution of the Commission.

44. Coloured Copy of this order to be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 3, 2025/msh/AJ CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 12 of 12 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 21/11/2025 at 21:27:52

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders