Delhi High Court - Orders
Woodland (Aero Club) Pvt. Ltd vs M/S Speedways Tyre Treads & Anr on 30 October, 2025
Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~40
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 1155/2025 & I.A. 26793-26797/2025
WOODLAND (AERO CLUB) PVT. LTD. .....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Abhijit Mittal, Mr. Anukalp Jain,
Ms. Shaivya Singh and Ms. Ankita
Bhattacharjee, Advs.
versus
M/S SPEEDWAYS TYRE TREADS
& ANR. .....Defendants
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
ORDER
% 30.10.2025 I.A. 26794/2025 (for seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation)
1. This is an application under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ['CPC'], filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from instituting pre- litigation mediation.
2. 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. Keerthi1 , exemption from the requirement of pre- institution mediation is granted to the Plaintiff.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 26795/2025 (seeking leave from serving advance service)
4. The present application has been filed under Section 151 of CPC, on 1 (2024) 5 SCC 815 CS(COMM) 1155/2025 Page 1 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 behalf of the Plaintiff seeking exemption from service to the Defendants.
5. In view of the fact that the Plaintiff has sought an ex parte ad-interim injunction along with the appointment of a Local Commissioner, the exemption from effecting service upon the Defendants at this stage is granted.
6. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 26797/2025 (exemption from filing hand written copies)
7. This application under Section 151 of CPC, has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from filing typed copies of handwritten documents.
8. The typed copies of the handwritten documents be filed within four (4) weeks.
9. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. CS(COMM) 1155/2025
10. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
11. Summons be issued to Defendant No.1 by all permissible modes on filing of process fee. Affidavit of service be filed within two (2) weeks.
12. The summons shall indicate that the written statement must be filed within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the summons. Defendant No.1 shall also file affidavit of admission/denial of the documents filed by the plaintiff, failing which the written statement shall not be taken on record.
13. The Plaintiff is at liberty to file replication thereto within thirty (30) days after filing of the written statement. The replication shall be accompanied by affidavit of admission/denial in respect of the documents filed by Defendant No.1, failing which the replication shall not be taken on record.
CS(COMM) 1155/2025 Page 2 of 15This 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59
14. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to an order of costs against the concerned party.
15. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
16. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that he will file affidavit of the dummy customer who visited the premises of Defendant No.1 as well an affidavit disclosing its sale figures within two (2) weeks.
17. No summons is being issued to Defendant No.2, since it is a proforma party.
18. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) on 20.11.2025.
19. List before Court on 18.03.2026.
I.A. 26793/2025 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)
20. This is an application filed under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, on behalf of the Plaintiff seeking ex-parte ad- interim injunction against Defendant No.1.
21. Mr. Abhijit Mittal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff, sets up the Plaintiff's case as under:
21.1. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of manufacturing, supplying and exporting of leather products like shoes, slippers, garments and other materials.
21.2. The Plaintiff was founded in Quebec, Canada and entered the Indian market in 1992 under the brand of WOODLAND. The Plaintiff owns and operates the website https://www.woodlandworldwide.com/ which contains information about the Plaintiff inter-alia the products offered and services rendered by it.
21.3. The website also predominantly displays the Plaintiff's trademarks CS(COMM) 1155/2025 Page 3 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 WOODLAND/ and Tree Mark Logo ['Plaintiff's trademarks']. The Plaintiff's earliest registration in India was for device mark in Class 25 bering TM No. 573949, which was obtained in the year 1992.
21.4. The Plaintiff has registration for the wordmark WOODLAND in class 25 bearing TM No. 856619 ['WOODLAND mark'], and has trademark registration for the device mark in class 25 bearing TM No. 3727313 ['Tree Mark Logo']. Details of Plaintiff's trademarks have been set out in paragraph '10' of the plaint.
21.5. The Tree mark consists of a combination of 18 leaves that are carefully structured and uniquely designed to give it a distinctive overall get up.
21.6. The trademark WOODLAND and the trademark Tree Mark Logo, along with the shoe designs are distinctively indicative to that of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff's trademarks with respect to leather and its allied products has been used so extensively for several decades, that the trademarks WOODLAND and the Tree Mark Logo per se has become synonymous only with the Plaintff, and has attained their own idenity CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 severally and jointly.
21.7. The Plaintiff has expended huge sums of money towards advertisement and promotion of its products. The sales promotion expenditure incurred by the Plaintiff in 2024-2025 is Rs. 925 crores. Knowledge about Defendant No.1 21.8. Defendant No.1 is engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing and sale of footwear including but not limited to shoes, floaters and slippers, etc. 21.9. Defendant No. 1, sometime in 2017-2018, was engaged by the Plaintiff as one of its contract manufacturers and packers for a specific range of footwear products. Pursuant thereto, Defendant No. 1 was permitted, on a purchase order basis, to manufacture footwear for and on behalf of the Plaintiff strictly in accordance with the Plaintiff's proprietary designs, technical specifications, and quality standards, and to affix thereon the Plaintiff's registered trademark WOODLAND along with its distinctive Tree Mark logo, solely for supply to the Plaintiff.
Defendant No. 1 was granted this limited right only in respect of the specific number of shoes ordered by the Plaintiff from it. It was given no right or business whatsoever to use the proprietary information including but not limited to trademarks, designs of the Plaintiff for any other purposes. 21.10. The last order placed by the Plaintiff with Defendant No.1 for contract manufacturing its shoes was in the year 2018, and thereafter no further order was placed by the Plaintiff. Since, the Plaintiff stopped working with Defendant No.1, all permissions, licences, and authorizations granted thereof ceased automatically, and Defendant No.1 had no further right or entitlement to use, reproduce, or otherwise exploit any of the Plaintiff's trade indicia in any form.
CS(COMM) 1155/2025 Page 5 of 15This 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 21.11. However, the Plaintiff recently learnt that Defendant No.1 has unauthorizedly commenced the manufacture, marketing, and sale of footwear bearing the Plaintiff's registered trademarks, including the WOODLAND mark and the Tree Mark Logo ['impugned products'].
22. Mr. Abhijit Mittal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that Defendant No.1's use of these identical and deceptively similar marks is being carried out without any licence, consent, or authorization from the Plaintiff. Defendant No.1 is advertising, promoting, and offering these impugned products for sale through various third-party online and e- commerce platforms such as Amazon India.
22.1. He states that, in order to verify the authenticity of the infringing and deceptive activities undertaken by Defendant No. 1, the Plaintiff had assigned a dummy customer to visit the warehouse of Defendant No. 1. Upon visit, it was observed that thousands of shoes had been manufactured and were in the process of being distributed, and some of the said impugned products were obtained by the dummy customer.
22.2. He states that on perusal of the impugned products obtained by the Plaintiff, it is evident that there is a clear use of the Plaintiff's trademarks and its proprietary shoe design. Additionally, there is also a resemblance between the Plaintiff's products and those of the impugned products in terms of its shape, colour, design, placement of logo and surface patterns. 22.3. He states that Defendant No. 1's impugned products bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks are being listed on the website of Defendant No. 2/Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. On the said website, the impugned products are displayed under the brand name WOODLAND. The product details mention Defendant No. 1 as the manufacturer at the bottom of the CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 page; however, under the headers 'From the Manufacturer' and 'About Us', the description provided pertains to the Plaintiff company, thereby further establishing Defendant No. 1's intent to mislead and defraud consumers. 22.4. He states that Defendant No. 1's use of identical and deceptively similar marks is entirely without any licence, consent, or authorization from the Plaintiff. Furthermore, it is evident that when the Plaintiff's products and those of Defendant No. 1 are viewed in their entirety, they are visually very similar. The same clearly establishes that the adoption of the Plaintiff's trademarks is ex facie dishonest and seems to be a deliberate ploy on part of Defendant No.1 to come as close as possible to the Plaintiff's products in order to ride on the goodwill and reputation garnered by the Plaintiff. 22.5. He further states that, it is very likely that owing to the near identity of the logo of the impugned products, consumers may believe that the same is an extension of the Plaintiff's trademark range of products, and the Plaintiff has authorized Defendant No.1 to use the same. Therefore, there is no doubt that the same is likely to cause confusion among the consuming public as to the source and/or origin of the impugned products. Court's Findings
23. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff and perused the record. Comparison chart of the aforementioned impugned products with the Plaintiff's products, as set out in paragraph '35' of the plaint, is as under:
CS(COMM) 1155/2025 Page 7 of 15This 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 Plaintiff's Product Defendant No.1's Impugned Product CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59
24. On a perusal of the said products, it prima facie appears that Defendant No.1 has affixed the replica of the Plaintiff's registered CS(COMM) 1155/2025 Page 9 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 wordmark WOODLAND and the registered Tree Mark Logo on its impugned products.
25. The facts relating to the pre-existing contract manufacturing relationship between the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 demonstrate that Defendant No. 1 is fully aware of the goodwill and reputation associated with the Plaintiff's marks and products. The action of Defendant No. 1 in manufacturing shoes which have designs deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's product and affixing the Plaintiff's marks to the impugned products is a blatant attempt to pass off its goods as the goods of the Plaintiff.
26. The listing of the Defendant No. 1's product on Defendant No. 2's e- commerce platform, which provides misleading information about the Plaintiff's association with the products offered clearly shows the dishonest intent of the Defendant No. 1 to mislead the unwary consumers as regards to the source of the goods.
27. In overall conspectus, Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for the grant of ex parte ad interim injunction against Defendant No.1. 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 Plaintiff. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Plaintiff, and against Defendant No.1.
28. Accordingly, until further orders the following directions are being issued:
i. Defendant No.1, his business associates, partners, agents, employees, and anyone acting for and on his behalf are hereby CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 restrained from manufacturing, selling, exporting, distributing, packaging, advertising, promoting, whether through offline or online means, or in any manner dealing with the impugned products bearing Plaintiff's registered wordmark WOODLAND and registered Tree Mark Logo/ , formative marks or any other mark or trade dress which is identical or confusingly similar to the Plaintiff's trademarks or trade dress in relation to identical or any allied or cognate goods or services in any manner whatsoever;
ii. Defendant No.1 is also restrained from using indicia whatsoever to show any association or connection of Defendant No.1 or its products with the Plaintiff; iii. Defendant No.2 is directed to take down the listings of Defendant No.1's impugned products bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks within one (1) week.
29. In view of the fact that the Plaintiff have sought appointment of a Local Commissioner to seize the impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks, the very purpose of the grant of ex parte ad interim injunction would be defeated if Defendant No.1 is given notices contemplated in Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC prior to the execution of the commission. Hence, it is directed that the Plaintiff 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) 1155/2025 Page 11 of 15This 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59
30. Upon steps being taken by the Plaintiff, issue notice to the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 through all modes.
31. Reply be filed by Defendant No. 1 within four (4) weeks from receipt of notice. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within four (4) weeks thereafter.
32. Defendant No. 2 will file compliance affidavit within four (4) weeks.
33. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) on 20.11.2025.
34. List before Court on 18.03.2026.
I.A. 26796/2025 (for 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 Local Commissioner, the appointment is confined thereto.
S.NO ADDRESS LOCAL COMMISSIONER
1. 002, Suchi Pind Road, Bye Pass Mr. Pratyush Sharma
Road, G.T. Road, Jalandhar, (Enrl. No. D-3864a/2010;
Punjab, 144009 Phone No. 9711744465)
37. The mandate of the Local Commissioner is as under: -
i. The Local Commissioner shall visit the premises of Defendant No.1 as mentioned above, to inspect and seize the impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks.
ii. The Local Commissioner is permitted to seize impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks at the above premises, and if knowledge is acquired of any other premises where the goods 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.CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 iii. The Local Commissioner shall also inspect and seize any goods/materials including pamphlets, brochures, stickers, packaging materials, dyes or blocks used for preparing the manufacturing materials, display boards, sign boards, advertising material, dyes or blocks, unfinished, packed, unpacked impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks or any other documents, wrapper etc. so that it can be ensured that no fresh manufacturing of the impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks can take place.
iv. The Local Commissioner shall also obtain the details as to since when impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks have been used by Defendant No.1 and obtain copies of the account, if the same is found to be sold in the 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 Defendant No.1 and take a photocopy and/or record of all such transactions that pertain to impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks, if any. Defendant No.1 shall cooperate and give passwords to the computers and the files containing the accounts, if the same are stored on the computer or a specific software. vi. After preparation of the inventory, the impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks, in fully manufactured or unfinished condition, including packaging materials, advertising, promotional materials, pamphlets, brochures, boxes, videos, CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 hoardings, brochures, banners, signage, cartons and other material, shall be released to Defendant No.1 on Superdari. The monetary value of the stock shall also be ascertained. vii. The Local Commissioner is also permitted to break open the locks, with the help of the local police, if access to the premises where the impugned product bearing the Plaintiff's trademarks have been stocked/manufactured, is denied to the Commissioners.
viii. Upon being requested, the concerned, the Station House Officer ['SHO'] and/or the concerned Superintendent of Police having jurisdiction over the aforesaid jurisdiction, shall render necessary cooperation for execution of the commission, as per this order. ix. The Local Commissioner is permitted to take photographs and videography of the proceedings of the commission, if it is deemed appropriate.
x. The Local Commissioner, while executing the commission, shall ensure that there is no disruption to the business of Defendant No.1, 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 Commissioner upon Defendant No.1 at the time of execution of the commission.
38. The order passed today shall be communicated by the Local Commissioners to Defendant No.1.
39. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed at Rs. 2,50,000/- , CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59 excluding out-of-pocket expenses, travel expenses, and accommodation expenses, etc., which are to be borne by the Plaintiff.
40. The Local Commission shall be executed within two (2) weeks. The report of the Local Commissioner shall be filed within two (2) weeks thereafter.
41. The order passed today shall not be uploaded for a period of two (2) weeks to enable the execution of the commission.
42. Accordingly, this application is disposed of.
43. The order passed today, shall not be uploaded for a period of two (2) weeks for enabling the execution of the commission.
44. Either, the learned counsel for the Plaintiff or the Local Commissioner is directed to collect certified copy of this order from the Registry (Dispatch Branch) before for execution of the Commission.
45. The 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 Defendant No.1 by the learned Local Commissioner at the time of the execution of the Commission.
46. Colored copy of this order to be given dasti under the signature of the Court Master.
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J OCTOBER 30, 2025/msh/aa CS(COMM) 1155/2025 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 14/11/2025 at 21:17:59