Delhi High Court - Orders
Apeejay Stya Knowledge Llp & Anr vs Naya Samaj Parents Association.. & Anr on 20 October, 2020
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 459/2020
APEEJAY STYA KNOWLEDGE LLP & ANR. ..... Plaintiff
Represented by: Mr. Amarjit Singh, Advocate.
versus
NAYA SAMAJ PARENTS ASSOCIATION.. & ANR.... Defendants
Represented by: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 20.10.2020 The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing. I.A. 9491/2020 (exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. 9490/2020 (exemption from filing original documents)
1. Original documents, if any, be filed within two weeks of the resumption of the normal Court functioning.
2. Application is disposed of.
CS(COMM) 459/2020 & I.A. 9489/2020 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)
1. Plaint be registered as suit.
2. Issue summons in the suit and notice in the application to the defendant on the plaintiff taking steps through e-mail, SMS, WhatsApp, speed post, courier and dasti returnable before this Court on 16th February, 2021.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANDEEP KUMARSigning Date:21.10.2020 07:15:26 CS(COMM) 459/2020 Page 1 of 3 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Mukta Gupta
3. Written statement and reply affidavit along with affidavit of admission/denial be filed within 30 days. Replication and rejoinder affidavit along with affidavit of admission/denial be filed within three weeks thereafter.
4. Case of the plaintiffs is that the plaintiff No. 1 is the proprietor and owner of the intellectual property, rights in the mark 'APEEJAY/APJ' including the services relating to field of education. Plaintiff No. 2 is the licensee of plaintiff No. 1. The said mark was adopted by the plaintiffs in the year 1967 and since then the same is being used in respect of educational services and is an essential and prominent feature of the services provided by the plaintiffs. It is the case of the plaintiffs that by passage of time, the plaintiffs have established around 29 educational institutions and has, therefore, earned great goodwill.
5. Grievance of the plaintiffs in the present suit is that defendant No. 1 claims to be an association of the parents of the schools in Delhi also purported to be duly registered under the Societies Registration Act in April, 2018. Defendant No. 2 claims herself to be the President of defendant No. 1 association. Defendant No. 1 association is not recognised by the Parents Teachers' Association of the schools administered and managed by the plaintiffs. Further, both the children of defendant No. 2 are studying with the plaintiff's school in Sheikh Sarai branch and Saket respectively. Thus, by using the mark 'apj' in the website, the defendants are using the tradename/mark of the plaintiffs i.e. 'APEEJAY/APJ' unauthorizedly. The defendants were earlier served with a cease and desist notice in July, 2020. In response thereto, on 1st August, 2020, the defendants sent reply wherein the defendants did not take any concrete defence. Primarily, the defence of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANDEEP KUMAR Signing Date:21.10.2020 07:15:26 CS(COMM) 459/2020 Page 2 of 3 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Mukta Gupta the defendant No. 1 is that it is a charitable organization and not a funds raising organization and that they are not dealing in any goods so as to infringe the plaintiffs' trademark.
6. Considering the averments in the plaint and particularly the fact that defendant No. 1 is not a Parents Teachers' Association recognised by the plaintiffs' school, use of the trademark of the plaintiffs as part of the e-mail address of defendant No. 1 amounts to violation of plaintiffs' rights in the said mark, this Court finds that the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case in their favour and in case no ex-parte ad interim injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs would suffer an irreparable loss. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants.
7. Consequently, till the next date of hearing before this Court, an ex- parte ad interim injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants in terms of prayers made in I.A. No.9489/2020.
8. Compliance under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC be done within two weeks.
9. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
OCTOBER 20, 2020 'a' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SANDEEP KUMAR Signing Date:21.10.2020 07:15:26 CS(COMM) 459/2020 Page 3 of 3 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ Mukta Gupta