Vishnu And Company Trademarks Pvt. Ltd vs Smotect Private Limited & Ors on 12 December, 2025

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Vishnu And Company Trademarks Pvt. Ltd vs Smotect Private Limited & Ors on 12 December, 2025

Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                          $~42
                          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         CS(COMM) 1333/2025 & I.A. 31184-31187/2025
                                    VISHNU AND COMPANY TRADEMARKS PVT. LTD.
                                                                           .....Plaintiff
                                                 Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Manish Biala,
                                                          Mr. Arun Kumar Jha, Advs.

                                                                  versus

                                    SMOTECT PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.                                                  .....Defendants
                                                 Through: None

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                                  ORDER

% 12.12.2025 I.A. 31187/2025(seeking exemption from filing typed/certified copies)

1. The present application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908, ['CPC'] has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from filing true typed and certified copies of documents.

2. Subject to the Plaintiff filing the true typed and certified copies of document sought to be relied upon within four (4) weeks from today, exemption is granted for the present, failing which the Plaintiff will not be entitled to rely upon the said documents.

3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 31186/2025(seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation mediation)

4. This is an application under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 CPC, filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation mediation.

CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 1 of 10

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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05

5. Having regard to the facts that the present suit contemplates urgent interim relief and in light of the judgement 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.

6. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 31185/2025(seeking leave to file additional documents)

7. This is an application seeking leave to file additional documents under Order XI Rule 1(4) of CPC [as amended by the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 ('Commercial Courts Act')], filed by the Plaintiff within 30 days.

8. The Plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents will file the same within thirty (30) days from today, and it shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 ('DHC Rules').

9. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

10. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

CS(COMM) 1333/2025

11. The present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade marks, copyright, disparagement, defamation, damage to reputation, passing off and other ancillary rights against the Defendants.

12. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

13. Summons be issued to the Defendants by all permissible modes on filing of process fee. Affidavit of service(s) be filed within two weeks.

14. The summons shall indicate that the written statement(s) must be filed within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the summons. The 1 (2024) 5 SCC 815 CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 2 of 10 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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05 Defendants shall also file affidavits of admission/denial of the documents filed by the Plaintiff, failing which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.

15. The Plaintiff is at liberty to file replication thereto within thirty (30) days after filing of the written statement(s). The replication shall be accompanied by affidavits of admission/denial in respect of the documents filed by the Defendants, failing which the replication shall not be taken on record.

16. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to an order of costs against the concerned party.

17. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

18. List before the Court on 30.01.2026.

I.A. 31184/2025(application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)

19. This is an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC filed by the Plaintiff seeking ex parte ad-interim injunction against the Defendants.

20. Mr. Pravin Anand, learned counsel for the Plaintiff has set up the case of the Plaintiff as under:

20.1 The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of chewing tobacco, pan masala, zarda, gutkha, khaini, silver coated elaichi, kesar, scented and sweet supari, mouth fresheners etc. through its franchises all across India. The Plaintiff is the proprietor of the mark 'VIMAL' which was adopted in the year 1986, under which the Plaintiff conducts its business. The details of the list of 20.2 20.3 the Plaintiff's various trademark applications and registrations thereof CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 3 of 10 This is a digitally signed order.

20.4 The Plaintiff's trademarks and its variant logos /labels ['Plaintiff's label'] are original artistic works within the meaning of Copyright Act, 1957 and the Plaintiff is the first owner of the copyright therein.

20.5 The Plaintiff's products under the Plaintiff's trademarks are not only sold in India but are also exported to various other countries across the globe.

20.6 The Plaintiff has also hired the services of famous Bollywood celebrities including Mr. Shahrukh Khan, Mr. Ajay Devgn and Mr. Tiger Shroff to advertise its products and the expenses on advertisement and promotions incurred by the Plaintiff's licensees run more than Rs. 200 crores every year.

21. The Defendant No. 1 to 3 ['infringing Defendants'] are engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling purported smoking cessation aids and alternatives, including products under the brand names 'Smotect AZAADI'. The Defendant No. 1 is a business concern while the Defendant No. 2 and 3 are its directors.

21.1 The Defendants operate a website at www.smotect.com and actively promote their products on various social media platforms, including CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 4 of 10 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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05 Instagram, i.e., the platform owned by Defendant No. 4/Meta INC., who has been arrayed herein as a proforma Defendant only for the purpose of compliances of the orders passed in the present suit.

22. It is stated that in November 2025, Plaintiff first discovered that the infringing Defendants have published and circulated an advertisement video ['impugned video'] as a story on their Instagram page, details of which are enlisted at paragraph '14' of the plaint. The video was structured in a way that portrays the Plaintiff's product 'VIMAL ELAICHI' as harmful while promoting the Defendant's product as a purportedly safe and an effective alternative to the Plaintiff's products.

23. It is stated that in the impugned video a representative of the infringing Defendants is seen engaging himself in a conversation with another person about the worst side effects of Tobacco consumption. During this exchange, the Plaintiff's label of its product 'VIMAL ELAICHI' ['impugned label'] is prominently displayed as an image on the impugned video. The said label remains visibly on screen. Screenshot(s) of the said image displaying on the impugned video is provided at paragraph '15' of the plaint.

24. It is stated that upon further examination by the Plaintiff, it was discovered that there are multiple additional videos on Defendant's CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 5 of 10 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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05 Instagram page that follow the same pattern of targeting the Plaintiff's product i.e., VIMAL ELAICHI and using Plaintiff's label on its videos. These videos feature various individuals holding, displaying, or being shown with the Plaintiff's label of its VIMAL ELAICHI product, sometimes blurred, sometimes partially shown yet always easily identifiable to an average consumer. The details of the videos are set out at paragraph '16' of the plaint.

25. Mr. Pravin Anand, learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in their impugned videos are showing the Plaintiff's label of 'VIMAL ELAICHI' product which is not a Tobacco product and does not cause any adverse health effects at all, therefore, in the entire video the infringing Defendants are referring to Plaintiff's product VIMAL ELAICHI as a tobacco containing product, which is harmful to health, and the insinuation drawn therein is disparagement.

25.1 He states that contrary to the pan-masala products of the Plaintiff, the product of VIMAL ElAICHI is not required to carry any statutory prohibition as it does not cause any adverse health effects, it is a type of mouth freshener, and not injurious to health, at all. 25.2 He states that the impugned video advertisements of the infringing Defendants is an attempt to gain cheap publicity by creating a controversy and come up in the market by way of unhealthy competition and defame the Plaintiff's brand and divert its consumer base.

25.3 He states that the infringing Defendants have singled out and targeted the Plaintiff's product majorly in their disparaging campaign, even when there are several other competitors in the market, to ride upon the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff and for its Commercial benefit.

CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 6 of 10

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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05 25.4 He states that the infringing Defendants have featured and visually emphasized Plaintiff's label of its 'VIMAL ELAICHI' product on its impugned videos, while calling it gutkha/chewing tobacco, to create misleading associations, and damage Plaintiff's goodwill and reputation.

26. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs and perused the record.

27. Plaintiff has duly served an advance copy of the plaint along with the applications to the Defendant nos. 1 to 3. Learned counsels state that after advance service, Defendant no. 2 has reached out to the Plaintiff and submitted that Defendant no. 2 is willing to remove the label of the Plaintiff's Product from its Instagram reels. The matter was passed over to await the presence of Defendants. Learned counsel states that at the pass- over stage as well, Plaintiff had reached out to Defendant no. 2 who has expressed his inability to join the proceedings through video conferencing link.

28. In view of the averments made in the plaint, this Court is of the prima facie view that the Defendant No. 1 to 3 have wrongly used the Plaintiff's product label 'VIMAL ELAICHI' in its impugned video and wrongfully called it out to be a gutkha product containing tobacco, while it is not injurious to health. And doing so, the Defendants have also infringed upon the copyright of the Plaintiff's label 'VIMAL ELAICHI' CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 7 of 10 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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05 .

29. Balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants. Irreparable injury would be caused to the Plaintiff if an ex parte ad interim injunction as prayed is not granted in favour of the Plaintiff.

30. Consequently, till the next date of hearing, the Defendants and all persons acting for or on their behalf are restrained from using the Plaintiff's label or any other label identical or deceptively similar thereto, in any manner whatsoever, including in any advertisements or promotional media amounting to infringement of Plaintiff's copyright therein.

31. The Defendant is also restrained from using any indica whatsoever to show any association of the Plaintiff's product 'VIMAL ELAICHI' with the Defendants advertisement campaigns.

32. The Defendant No. 2 is directed to take down the impugned videos listed at Annexure A, attached to this order within 72 hours from receipt of this order.

CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 8 of 10

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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05

33. Defendant no. 2 is directed to remain personally present in Court on the next date of hearing.

34. In case Defendant nos. 1, 2 and 3 fail to take down the videos, the Plaintiff will be at liberty to write to Defendant no. 4/Meta Inc. for compliance of this order.

35. Issue notice to the Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 through all permissible modes, upon filing of process fees, returnable on the next date of hearing.

36. Let the reply to this application be filed within a period of four (4) weeks, from receipt of notice.

37. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter.

38. Compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC be done within a period of one (1) week.

39. List before the Court on 30.01.2026.

40. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of the order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J DECEMBER 12, 2025/mt/IB CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 9 of 10 This is a digitally signed order.

1. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DH5PkZSoBfI/

2. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DH1F-TqPICX/

4. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DH5Ox7AMKLZ/ CS(COMM) 1333/2025 Page 10 of 10 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 15/12/2025 at 20:49:05

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders