Delhi District Court
Aarogyaai Innovations Private Limited vs Ashok Kumar on 5 July, 2024
IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURT-02)
SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET COURT, NEW DELHI
CS (COMM) No. 347 of 2023
AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited .....Plaintiff
F-4, First Floor, Geetanjali Enclave,
New Delhi-110017 (India)
Versus
Ram Lal Teli .....Defendant No. 1
5-D-27, Housing Board, Tilak Nagar,
Bhilwara-311001, Rajasthan
Ashok Kumar .....Defendant No. 2
Address: Hidden/Unknown
Hostinger, UAB .....Defendant No. 3
Through its Authorized Representative
Jonavos g. 60C, 44192
Kaunas, Lithuania
Hosting Concepts B. V. d/b/a OpenProvider .....Defendant No. 4
Through its Authorized Representative
Kipstraat 3c, 5C
Department of Telecommunications (DoT) .....Defendant No. 5
Through Secretary
Ministry of Communications and IT,
Government of India, Sanchar Bhawan,
20, Ashoka Road, New Delhi - 110001
Ministry of Electronics and Information
Technology (MeitY) .....Defendant No. 6
Through the Director General (DIT) Cyber
Laws & E-Security
AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 1 Of 10
(Government of India),
Electronics Niketan, 6, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003
Date of Institution : 06.06.2023
Date of Submissions : 02.07.2024
Date of Judgment : 05.07.2024
JUDGM ENT
1.Case of the plaintiff is that the Plaintiff owns rights in the Trade Marks "AarogyaAI" and . The Plaintiff company was incorporated on 31st May, 2019 under the Companies Act, 2013. It is stated that AarogyaAI is a software powered by Artificial Intelligence analyse genomic data to recommend appropriate drugs for infectious diseases, especially, in respect to Tuberculosis. AarogyaAI aims to diagnose drug- resistant tuberculosis(DR-TB) using Artificial Intelligence in a few hours and it enables quick and accurate diagnosis of DR-TB, It is stated that the Plaintiff purchased the domain name https://aarogya.ai/ on 22nd May 2019 and the same is in use and the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the Trade Marks AAROGYAAI (Logo) under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The details of the trademarks are given below:
Sl. App. No. Class Trade Status
NO. Marks
1. 4335076 9 Registered & Valid Upto
01/11/2029
2. 4335077 42 Registered & Valid Upto
01/11/2029
AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 2 Of 10
Plaintiff Domain Name Defendant No. 1 and 2
Domain Names
aarogya.ai
aarogyaai.com (Defendant No.
1)
aarogyaai.in (Defendant No. 2)
2. It is stated that the said trade mark AAROGYAAI is inherently distinctive being unique and arbitrary and has become distinctive indicium of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff's goods and services and the public at large associate, identify and distinguish the said trade mark with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff's said services alone and the said trade mark is synonymous with the business of the Plaintiff.
3. It is pleaded that in the 2nd week of April 2023, the AR of Plaintiff was searching for the domain names of its registered trademark AarogyaAI on Internet Domain Registrars and surprisingly, AR of Plaintiff found that two similar domain names aarogyaai.com and aarogyaai.in are registered and valid upto 03.06.2023 and the domain name aarogyaai.com is now renewed upto 03.06.2024. It is stated that both domain names are completely similar/ identical to the Plaintiff's prior adopted and registered trademark AAROGYAAI and domain name of the Plaintiff, https://aarogya.ai/. It is further stated that the Plaintiff AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 3 Of 10 checked the websites of GoDaddy WHOis wbsite and discovered that the details of the Registrants are redacted/ masked and thus, the Plaintiff was unable to track the person(s) who purchased the above-mentioned domain names. It is stated that for ease of understanding, the Plaintiff designated the domain names, aarogyaai.com as the Defendant No. 1 and aarogyaai.in as the Defendant No. 2 respectively.
4. It is pleaded that as per the information available on the WHOis websites, the Defendant No. 3, Hostinger, UAB is the Internet Domain Registrar for the Defendant No. 1's domain, aarogyaai.com and Defendant No. 4, Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a OpenProvider is the Internet Domain Registrar for the Defendant No. 2's domain, aarogyaai.in.
5. It is stated that the Plaintiff's counsel wrote an email with subject "Complaint Report - Similar Domain Registrations of aarogyaai.in and aarogyaai.com" to Defendant No. 3 and 4 on 11th May, 2023 to block the infringing domain names and the Defendant No. 3 and 4 responded on the same day to fill a form. It is stated that upon filling the form, the Defendant No. 3 and 4 responded that "We have informed the reseller about your complaint and he will investigate this issue. If we do not receive any update from them, we will suspend the domain after 2023-05-16 04:58:48 CEST and it will stop working.", However, no confirmation was received of the suspension of infringing domain names from the Defendant No. 3 and 4 and even, the Defendant No. 1's domain name aarogyaai.com is renewed and is now valid upto 3rd June 2024.
AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 4 Of 10
6. It is stated that the details of the Defendant No. 1 and 2 are not provided and since the infringing domain names are valid and active, the Defendant No. 1 and 2 may use and/or might have used the infringing domain names for any registration, login-in on any website, e-mail purpose, create accounts etc. and the Plaintiff demands the complete disclosure of the use of the infringing domain names since their creation/ purchase by the Defendant No. 1 and 2.
7. It is stated that the unauthorized and unconsented purchase by the Defendant No. 1 and 2 of the similar/ identical domain names might cause misrepresentation amongst the public and might be misused by the Defendant No. 1 and 2 for illegal activities under the name of Plaintiff's registered trademark AAROGYAAI and it has caused grave concern to the Plaintiff, not merely with the view to secure and enforce its own trademark rights but to protect the interests of consumers/ innocent public who have believed and/ or are going to believe that the infringing domain names are purchased by the Plaintiff which is not the case.
8. The Plaintiff impleaded Department of Telecommunications [DoT] as Defendant No. 5 and Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology [MeitY] as Defendant No. 6 respectively, as they are the authorities/ departments in the matter(s) of Information Technology. The limited relief claimed against Defendant No. 5, [DoT] and Defendant No. 6, [MeitY] is the issuance of a notification to the internet and telecom service AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 5 Of 10 providers registered with it to disable access in India to Defendant No. 1 and 2 purchased domains, aarogyaai.com and aarogyaai.in and future domains.
9. It is further stated that Defendant No. 1 and 2 have purchased the infringing domain names, aarogyaai.com and aarogyaai.in fraudulently and with sinister motive and out of positive greed with a view to take advantage and to trade upon the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiff in the said trademark AAROGYAAI.
10. Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has submitted that plaintiff is the registered owner of trademark "AarogyaAI" and since May 2019, whereas defendant no. 1 and 2 have purchased the domain names aarogyaai.com and aarogyaai.in in the year 2023 with the malafide intention and they have no right to use the infringing domain names without the prior permission and consent of the plaintiff. Counsel for plaintiff further submitted that the plaintiff runs official page of aarogyaai on Twitter and LinkedIn and has 3.1K followers in LinkedIn and 162 followers on Twitter. It is submitted that start up of the plaintiff has raised $700K as part of its seed funding and the said information has been gathered by digital platform YourStory on 07.01.2022. It has further been submitted that use of infringing domain names i.e. aarogyaai.com and aarogyaai.in of defendant no. 1 and 2 infringes the trademark rights of the plaintiff and they should be restrained from using the identical and deceptively similar domain names as that of plaintiff as the same are likely to deceive/confuse the general public at large. AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 6 Of 10
11. On 08.06.2023, exparte interim injunction was granted in favour of plaintiff u/O XXXIX rule 1 & 2 CPC . Defendant Nos. 1 and 2, their owners, proprietors, employees, partners, representatives and/or other acting for and on their behalf were restrained from using the trademark AAROGYAAI or any deceptively similar variant thereof, or in any manner amounting to infringement; passing off their services as those of plaintiff.
11.1 Further, defendant no. 3, its directors, partners, proprietor, officers, affiliates, servants, employees and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for an, on their behalf, or any claiming through, by or under it were directed to block the domain name i.e. aarogyaai.com registered by defendant no. 1 and defendant no.3 was further directed to disclose the contact particulars of the registrants.
11.2 Further defendant no. 4, its directors, partners, proprietor, officers, affiliates, servants, employees and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and, on their behalf or any one claiming through, by or under it were directed to block the domain name i.e. aarogyaai.in registered by defendant no. 2 and defendant no.4 was further directed to disclose the contact particulars of the registrants.
11.3 Further defendant no. 5 and 6 were directed to issue a notification calling upon Internet Service Providers to block access to the infringing domain names, aarogyaai.com and aarogyaai.in of the defendant no. 1 & 2 till next date of hearing. AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 7 Of 10
12. Summons were served upon the Defendants through ordinary process. On 27.07.2023 Plaintiff filed affidavit of service in compliance of provisions under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC; original speed post receipt dated 11.07.2023 and tracking records of summons sent to D-3 to D-6. On the same day, Plaintiff was also permitted to substitute D-1 with his correct name and address. Amended Memo of Parties was taken on record. No one appeared on behalf of D-1 and D-2 despite service on 14.08.2023, they were proceeded Exparte on 10.01.2024.
13. D-3 and D-4 in the meanwhile took down rogue websites which were copying the name of plaintiff. No relief survived against these defendants. Therefore, suit qua D-3 and D- 4 is dismissed as satisfied. D-5 and D-6 are the Government Departments who assisted the plaintiff in getting the websites down. Ld. counsel for plaintiff stated that rogue website using the infringing domain name are not there as of now. The prayer qua D-5 and D-6 also stands satisfied.
14. Defendant no 1 & 2, in view of the documents and statement of truth filed by the plaintiff, are permanently restrained from infringing or passing off registered trademark of plaintiff AAROGYAAI in any manner, including in form of Domain name.
15. The plaintiff has sought a decree of damages to the tune of Rs. 3,01,000/-.
AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 8 Of 10
16. In Jockey International Inc & Anr. Vs R. Chandra Mohan & Ors. 2014 (59) PTC 437 (Del) in para 43, it was held that damages must be awarded even in such cases where defendants choose to stay away from the proceedings of the Court and that defendants should not be permitted to enjoy the benefits of evasion of Court proceedings. A party who chooses not to participate in Court proceedings and stays away must suffer the consequences of damages as it cannot produce its account books. There is larger public purpose involved to discourage such parties indulging in such rights of deception and even if the same has a punitive element, it must be granted.
17. In the Hero Honda Motors Ltd. vs Shree Assuramji Scooter's 125 (2005) DLT 504 our High Court observed about the need of awarding damages against defendants who chose to stay away from the proceedings of the Court. It was further noted that every endeavour should be made to discourage such parties which indulge in acts of deception.
18. The time has come when the Courts dealing with actions for infringement of trade marks, copy rights, patents, etc. should not only grant compensatory damages but award punitive damages with a view to discourage and dishearten law breakers who indulge in violations with impunity out of lust for money so that they realize that in case they are caught, they would be liable not only to reimburse the aggrieved party but would be liable to pay punitive damages also, which may spell financial disaster for them.
AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 9 Of 10
19. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances noted above, this Court is of the considered view that plaintiff is entitled to lumpsum costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of economic and commercial advantage which the defendant tried to gain at the expenses of the enviable reputation which has been created by the plaintiff apart from injunction.
20. In view of the aforenoted findings, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed. A decree of permanent injunction in favour of plaintiff against the defendant no. 1 and 2 is hereby passed. File be consigned to record room.
(Dictated and announced on 5th July 2024 ) (ANURADHA SHUKLA BHARDWAJ ) District Judge (Commercial Court-02) South Distt., Saket, New Delhi AarogyaAI Innovations Private Limited vs ASHOK KUMAR & Ors. Page no. 10 Of 10