Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Reliance Industries Limited & Anr vs Olx India B. V. & Anr on 5 April, 2024

Author: Sanjeev Narula

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

                                    $~12
                                    *           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    +           CS(COMM) 144/2020
                                                RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ANR                                                  ..... Plaintiffs
                                                                                      Through:                 Ms. Vaishali Mittal, Mr. Shivang
                                                                                                               Sharma and Mr. Siddhant Chamola,
                                                                                                               Advocates.

                                                                                      versus

                                                OLX INDIA B. V. & ANR                                                             ..... Defendants
                                                                                      Through:                 Mr. Prithvi Singh and Mr. Shiv
                                                                                                               Mehrotra, Advocates.

                                                CORAM:
                                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                                                             ORDER

% 05.04.2024 I.A. 4056/2020(u/O XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC on behalf of Plaintiffs) & I.A. 4700/2020(u/O XXXIX Rule 4 of CPC on behalf of Defendants)

1. On 28th May, 2020, while granting an ad-interim injunction, this Court observed as follows:

"11. Learned counsel for the defendant Nos.1 and 2 states that they have also added filters with the words JIO and RELIANCE so that in future nobody can misuse the platform of the defendants with these false and fictitious advertisement so as to defraud the job seekers and infringe the plaintiffs trademarks/trade names.
12. Considering the averments in the plaint and the application, the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case in their favour and in case no ad-interim injunction is granted they would suffer an irreparable loss. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs. Consequently, an interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants in terms of prayer (a) as prayed for in para 57 of the application is granted."

2. Subsequently, in the above-captioned application filed by Defendants CS(COMM) 144/2020 Page 1 of 3 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 19/04/2024 at 22:08:06 [I.A. 4700/2020], this Court passed order dated 27th November, 2020, to the following effect:

"2. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, it is clarified that the interim order passed on 28th May, 2020 in terms of prayer (a) in Para 57 of I.A.4056/2020 against defendants would have application only in relation to jobs of JIO and RELIANCE and its variations and will have no application to the sale of the products on the defendants' platform in respect of trademarks JIO and RELIANCE or its variations. This is, however, subject to the rights of the plaintiff, in case the use of two trade names and its variations is misused or violated in any form to take further action thereon."

3. With the consent of the counsel, the injunction granted on 28th May, 2020 as clarified on 27th November, 2020 shall continue to operate during the pendency of the present suit.

4. Accordingly, both applications are disposed of.

CS(COMM) 144/2020

5. Pleadings are complete. Parties have filed their affidavit of admission/ denial. Let joint schedule of documents be filed within two weeks from today.

6. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 29 th April, 2024.

7. Ms. Vaishali Mittal, counsel for Plaintiffs, on instructions, states that the Plaintiffs are not insisting on their claims for damages or costs, and thus only seek the relief of permanent injunction. She argues that Plaintiff No. 1's proprietorship of the trademarks "RELIANCE" and "JIO" is not in dispute. Ms. Mittal thus suggests that no evidence is necessary and the matter can straightway be put for arguments on the legal issues that arise for consideration qua the Plaintiffs' claim for relief of injunction. Mr. Prithvi CS(COMM) 144/2020 Page 2 of 3 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 19/04/2024 at 22:08:06 Singh, counsel for Defendants, is agreeable to this suggestion.

8. In light of the aforenoted stand, counsel for parties are directed to carry their proposed issues on the next date of hearing, and exchange copies thereof with each other.

9. Re-notify on 29th July, 2024.

SANJEEV NARULA, J APRIL 5, 2024 d.negi CS(COMM) 144/2020 Page 3 of 3 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 19/04/2024 at 22:08:06