Delhi High Court - Orders
Inventio Ag And Anr vs Schneider Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. And ... on 18 November, 2022
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~29
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 3/2022
INVENTIO AG AND ANR
..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr.Ranjan Narula, Adv.
versus
SCHNEIDER ELEVATOR INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANR.
..... Defendant
Through: Mr. Nilesh N. Bhagwat, Adv. for D-1
& D-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
ORDER
% 18.11.2022
I.A. 18910/2022
1. Issue notice.
2. Notice is accepted by Mr. Nilesh N. Bhagwat, the learned counsel on behalf of the defendant nos.1 and 2.
3. Let notice of this application be served on the proposed defendant no.3, through all modes, including electronically, returnable on 10th January 2023 before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial).
4. Reply, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks from today/receipt of notice. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.
5. This application has been filed by the plaintiff praying for the following relief:-
"a. restraining the Proposed Defendant, its partners, successor in rights, their servants, agents, franchisees, stockiest, from trading, selling, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:22.11.2022 17:18:06 marketing, offering for sale or dealing in respect of any goods/services in any manner whatsoever, under the mark or variant thereof/ or any other mark/ logo which is identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered marks and to infringement of the registered trademarks of the Plaintiffs in accordance with the details of the registrations enumerated in paragraphs 8 and 16 of the plaint;
b. An ex-parte order restraining the Proposed Defendant, its partners, successor in rights, their servants, agents, franchisees, stockiest, from trading, selling, marketing, offering for sale or dealing in respect of any goods/services in any manner whatsoever, under the mark/logo , and refrain from using similar website layout and interface as the Plaintiffs' website, including the color scheme of grey and red, similar pictures/photographs, the placement of contents/logos, the look and feel of the Plaintiffs website and/or use of similar logos/trademarks/technology names/product nomenclature on the website or social media accounts."
6. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant nos. 1 and 2, that is, Schneider Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. and Schneider Elevator Pvt. Ltd., and this Court, vide an ad interim order of injunction dated 04.01.2022, restrained the defendant no. 1 and 2 in terms of prayers made in paragraph 13 (i) and (ii) of I.A. 47/2022. The said prayers are reproduced hereinbelow: -
i. An ex-parte order restraining the Defendants, their partners, successor in rights, their servants, agents, franchisees, stockiest, from trading, selling, marketing, offering for sale or dealing in respect of any goods/services in any manner whatsoever, under Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:22.11.2022 17:18:06 the mark/name, SCHNEIDER or variant thereof, www.schneiderelevatorindia.com and www.schneiderelevatorindia.in, use of email address [email protected] or any other mark/ logo which is identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered marks SCHINDLER, and , Plaintiffs domain names www.schindler.com, www.schindler.in and www.schindler.co.in amounting to infringement of the registered trademarks of the Plaintiffs in accordance with the details of the registrations enumerated in paragraphs 8 and 16 of the plaint;
ii. An ex-parte order restraining the Defendants, their partners, successor in rights, their servants, agents, franchisees, stockiest, from trading, selling, marketing, offering for sale or dealing in respect of any goods/services in any manner whatsoever, under the mark/name, SCHNEIDER www.schneiderelevatorindia.com and www.schneiderelevatorindia.in, use of email address [email protected] where Schneider forms the most important and key word or any other mark/logo which is identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs' SCHNEIDER/ , domain names www.schindler.com, www.schindler.in and www.schindler.co.in and/or doing the following:
a) refrain from using the overall get up, layout of the Plaintiffs products, which may amount to passing off the Defendants' goods/services as and for those of the goods of the Plaintiffs.
b) refrain from using the mark, SCHNEIDER as key Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:22.11.2022 17:18:06 element and distinguishing part of their trade name/corporate name.
c) refrain from using the Plaintiffs' product/service names/nomenclature and technical product codes to identify the products mentioned in para 25 (v).
d) refrain from using in any manner Plaintiffs Technology and Innovation products and names such as Schneider Ahead, Schneider RISE (confusingly similar to Schindler's trademarks Schindler Ahead, Schindler R.I.S.E).
e) refrain from using similar website layout and interface as the Plaintiffs' website, including the color scheme of grey and red, similar pictures/photographs, the placement of contents/logos, the look and feel of the Plaintiffs' website and/or use of similar logos/trademarks/technology names/ product nomenclature on the website or social media accounts."
7. The learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the said order of injunction continues to operate till date.
8. He further submits that as recorded in the above order itself, Mr. Vikas Mahajan is the Director of the defendant no.2 and the main person behind the defendant nos. 1 and 2.
9. He submits that the defendants, in order to circumvent the injunction, have formed a new company under the name 'VDMIL Elevator India' and continue to use the impugned logo(s)/marks of the plaintiff, including on its Facebook page. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has drawn my attention to the Facebook page in question.
10. It is further submitted that the connection/association between the defendants in the suit and VDMIL Elevator India is also evident from the fact that Mr. Sudhir Dattatraya Patil is the common Director of the defendants and VDMIL Elevator India.
11. The learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that aggrieved of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:22.11.2022 17:18:06 above, the plaintiff has already filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, being I.A. 16957/2022, and an application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking impleadment of VDMIL Elevator India, being I.A. 17000/2022, on which notices have been issued to the defendants.
12. Having considered the submissions made, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has been able to make out a good prima facie case in its favour for grant of an ad interim ex-parte injunction against the proposed defendant no.3 in the suit. It appears that the proposed defendant no.3 is being used only as a tool for escaping the rigour of the order of injunction dated 04.01.2022 passed by this Court. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiff and against the proposed defendant no.3. The plaintiff is likely to suffer grave irreparable injury, in case, an ad interim ex-parte order of injunction as prayed for is not granted.
13. In view of the above, an ad interim ex-parte order of injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the proposed defendant no.3, in terms of the prayer made in paragraph 11 (a) and (b) of the application reproduced hereinabove, till further orders.
14. Compliance with Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, be made within a period of two days from today.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J NOVEMBER 18, 2022/rv Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:22.11.2022 17:18:06